OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v1.0
Processors Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are evaluated mathematically under Frontumo Processors Methodology v1.0 using verified laboratory benchmarks, technical specifications, and authentic consumer ratings with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Processors Methodology v1.0

Intel Core i3 8100T Review | 78 Data compared

Avg. price:~£45PassMark benchmark result:5268N. of physical cores:4CPU boost clock speed:N/A GHzCPU socket:LGA1151TDP (Thermal design power):35 W

Intel Core i3 8100T Review: Compare 78 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

5.0

Overall score

Score
5.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the processor's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best processors on the market.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 62% of models
Score components

90%

4.7

Technical score

10%

7.3

User score

â–¼Worse than 62% of processors
4.7

Technical score

Technical score
4.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the processor's technical performance, covering key areas such as processing performance, core configuration, efficiency, platform support, integrated features, and thermal behavior.
When it matters
When you want to compare processors based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
Score components

60%

4.0

Performance

18%

4.9

Cache & Architecture

10%

5.7

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.6

Power & Thermal

4%

7.8

Platform

1%

6.8

Integrated Graphics

â–¼Worse than 65% of processors
7.3

User score

User score
7.3/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 96% of models
Score components

70%

8.4

User ratings

30%

5.0

Number of reviews

Based on 20 buyer reviews from online shops.
Read buyer reviews on Amazon →
How we calculate this
User ratings – average star rating across all shop listings, weighted by how many reviews each has, on a 1–10 scale.
Number of reviews – how many buyer reviews the product has, on a logarithmic scale; the 8% most-reviewed models in the category get 10.
â–¼Worse than 96% of processors
  • intel-core-i3-8100t
  • intel-core-i3-8100t
  • intel-core-i3-8100t
intel-core-i3-8100t
intel-core-i3-8100t
intel-core-i3-8100t

Best prices

*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.

Best rankings

Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i3 8100T

Technical score
Technical score
4.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the processor's technical performance, covering key areas such as processing performance, core configuration, efficiency, platform support, integrated features, and thermal behavior.
When it matters
When you want to compare processors based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
Score components:

60%

4.0

Performance

18%

4.9

Cache & Architecture

10%

5.7

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.6

Power & Thermal

4%

7.8

Platform

1%

6.8

Integrated Graphics

4.7
User score
User score
7.3/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 96% of models
Score components

70%

8.4

User ratings

30%

5.0

Number of reviews

Based on 20 buyer reviews from online shops.
Read buyer reviews on Amazon →
How we calculate this
User ratings – average star rating across all shop listings, weighted by how many reviews each has, on a 1–10 scale.
Number of reviews – how many buyer reviews the product has, on a logarithmic scale; the 8% most-reviewed models in the category get 10.
7.3
Popularity
Popularity
5.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you prefer to choose a processor reviewed and selected by many other buyers.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 78% of models
Popularity:
Intel Core i3 8100T has a popularity score of 5 points, which is higher than that of 78% of products in this category.
5.0
Value for money
Value for money
6.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 55% of models
Score components:

60%

5.0

Overall score

40%

10

Price

6.5
Brand name
Intel
Processor type
desktop
Processor type
desktop
â–² Better than 56% of models
This processor belongs to the desktop processor class, which is more advanced than that of 56% of processors and equal to that of 37.9% of processors.
CPU socket
LGA1151
CPU socket
LGA1151
â–² Better than 61% of models
This processor uses the LGA1151 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 60.7% of processors and equal to that of 9.4% of processors.
Chipset
Z390, Z370, Q370, H370, B365, B360, H310
Chipset
Z390, Z370, Q370, H370, B365, B360, H310
â–² Better than 57% of models
This processor supports Z390, Z370, Q370, H370, B365, B360, H310 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 57.2% of processors and equal to that of 4.4% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
CPU architecture
x86-64
â–² Better than 2% of models
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.7% of processors and equal to that of 98.3% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
4
N. of physical cores
4
â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 4 CPU cores, which is fewer than 50.7% of processors and equal to 28.5% of processors.
CPU threads
4
CPU threads
4
â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 4 CPU threads, which is fewer than 67.4% of processors and equal to 26.5% of processors.
Threads per core
1
Threads per core
1
â–¼ Worse than 70% of models
Market range: <0 – >2.5
This processor offers 1 threads per core, which is fewer than 69.8% of processors and equal to 30.2% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
N/A
CPU base clock speed
4x 3.1 GHz
CPU base clock speed
4x 3.1 GHz
â–¼ Worse than 57% of models
This processor has a base clock of 4x3.1 GHz which is lower than that of 57.3% of processors and equal to that of 1.5% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
14 nm
Semiconductor size
14 nm
â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 14 nm process node, which is older than that of 50.6% of processors and equal to that of 33.9% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 14 nm
Foundry
Intel 14 nm
â–¼ Worse than 55% of models
This processor is built on the Intel 14 nm foundry process, which is less advanced than that of 55.2% of processors and equal to that of 29.3% of processors.
L3 cache
6 MB
L3 cache
6 MB
â–¼ Worse than 60% of models
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 6 MB which is smaller than that of 60.4% of processors and equal to that of 9.7% of processors.
L2 cache
1 MB
L2 cache
1 MB
â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 1 MB which is smaller than that of 66.9% of processors and equal to that of 17.7% of processors.
L1 cache
256 KB
L1 cache
256 KB
â–¼ Worse than 59% of models
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 256 KB which is smaller than that of 59.4% of processors and equal to that of 18.6% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4
DDR memory version
DDR4
â–¼ Worse than 42% of models
This processor supports DDR DDR4, which is newer than that of 26.3% of processors and equal to that of 31.7% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
2,400 MHz
Maximum memory speed
2,400 MHz
â–¼ Worse than 63% of models
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 2,400 MHz, which is lower than that of 63% of processors and equal to 12.4% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR4-2400 MHz
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR4-2400 MHz
â–¼ Worse than 66% of models
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR4-2400 MHz, which is lower than that of 66.4% of processors and equal to 11.5% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
?
Maximum memory capacity
64 GB
Maximum memory capacity
64 GB
â–¼ Worse than 44% of models
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 64 GB of memory, which is more than 28.4% of processors and equal to 27.5% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
Integrated graphics
yes
â–² Better than 12% of models
This processor includes integrated graphics. 12.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
Integrated GPU model
Intel UHD Graphics 630
Integrated GPU model
Intel UHD Graphics 630
â–¼ Worse than 47% of models
This processor uses the Intel UHD Graphics 630 integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 44.3% of processors and equal to that in 8.3% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
?
Integrated GPU base frequency
350 MHz
Integrated GPU base frequency
350 MHz
â–² Better than 42% of models
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 350 MHz which is higher than that of 42.3% of processors and equal to that of 26.1% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
VC-1 (HW decode)
Integrated media encoders/decoders
VC-1 (HW decode)
â–¼ Worse than 82% of models
This processor supports VC-1 (HW decode) media codecs, which is narrower support than 82.1% of processors and equal to 3.6% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
35 W
TDP (Thermal design power)
35 W
â–² Better than 52% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 35 W which is lower than that of 51.9% of processors and equal to that of 14.8% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
35 W
Base power (PL1)
35 W
â–² Better than 52% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 35 W which is lower than that of 52% of processors and equal to that of 15% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
35 W
Boost power (PL2)
35 W
â–² Better than 74% of models
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 35 W which is lower than that of 74% of processors and equal to that of 5.4% of processors.
Tau (power duration limit)
N/A
Configurable TDP
yes
Configurable TDP
yes
â–² Better than 47% of models
This processor supports configurable TDP. 47.3% of processors support configurable TDP.
cTDP: 25 W
Show more

Intel Core i3 8100T vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceCache & ArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated GraphicsPower & Thermal
  • 18 °C lower CPU temperature
    CPU temperature
    82 °C
    ★ Better than 96% of models
    Market range: <95 °C – >105 °C
    This processor has a lower CPU temperature than the average processor (82 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
    82 °C vs 100 °C
  • Supports memory overclocking
    Memory overclocking
    yes
    â–² Better than 56% of models
    This processor supports memory overclocking, the average processor does not. 43.6% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • Supports ECC memory
    ECC memory support
    yes
    â–² Better than 68% of models
    This processor supports ECC memory, the average processor does not. 32.5% of processors support ECC memory.
  • 41.7% lower boost power
    Boost power (PL2)
    35 W
    â–² Better than 74% of models
    Market range: <25 W – >150 W
    This processor has a lower boost power draw than the average processor (35 W vs 60 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 60 W.
    35 W vs 60 W
  • 28.8% smaller die size
    Die size
    126 mm²
    â–² Better than 70% of models
    Market range: <99 mm² – >257 mm²
    This processor has a lower die size than the average processor (126 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    126 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 4.99x more popular
    Intel Core i3 8100T is more popular than the average processor (4.99 vs 1).
    4.99 vs 1
  • 5.56x cheaper
    Intel Core i3 8100T is cheaper than the average processor (£45 vs £250).
    £45 vs £250
  • Modern CPU socket
    CPU socket
    LGA1151
    â–² Better than 61% of models
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA1151 vs FP4).
    LGA1151 vs FP4
  • 4.99x more popular
    Intel Core i3 8100T is more popular than the average processor (4.99 vs 1).
    4.99 vs 1
  • 5.56x cheaper
    Intel Core i3 8100T is cheaper than the average processor (£45 vs £250).
    £45 vs £250
  • Modern CPU socket
    CPU socket
    LGA1151
    â–² Better than 61% of models
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA1151 vs FP4).
    LGA1151 vs FP4
  • 28.8% smaller die size
    Die size
    126 mm²
    â–² Better than 70% of models
    Market range: <99 mm² – >257 mm²
    This processor has a lower die size than the average processor (126 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    126 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    Microarchitecture codename
    Coffee Lake
    â–¼ Worse than 50% of models
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Coffee Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Coffee Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • Supports memory overclocking
    Memory overclocking
    yes
    â–² Better than 56% of models
    This processor supports memory overclocking, the average processor does not. 43.6% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • Supports ECC memory
    ECC memory support
    yes
    â–² Better than 68% of models
    This processor supports ECC memory, the average processor does not. 32.5% of processors support ECC memory.
  • 18 °C lower CPU temperature
    CPU temperature
    82 °C
    ★ Better than 96% of models
    Market range: <95 °C – >105 °C
    This processor has a lower CPU temperature than the average processor (82 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
    82 °C vs 100 °C
  • 41.7% lower boost power
    Boost power (PL2)
    35 W
    â–² Better than 74% of models
    Market range: <25 W – >150 W
    This processor has a lower boost power draw than the average processor (35 W vs 60 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 60 W.
    35 W vs 60 W
  • 22.2% lower base power
    Base power (PL1)
    35 W
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (35 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    35 W vs 45 W
  • 50.2% lower PassMark score
    PassMark benchmark result
    5,268
    â–¼ Worse than 71% of models
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (5,268 vs 10,572.5). The average processor scores 10,572.5 in PassMark benchmark.
    5,268 vs 10,572.5
  • 25.5% weaker single-core performance
    PassMark single-core benchmark score
    1,863
    â–¼ Worse than 77% of models
    Market range: <1.4k – >4k
    This processor has a lower PassMark single-core score than the average processor (1,863 vs 2,500). The average processor scores 2,500 in PassMark single-core.
    1,863 vs 2,500
  • 2 fewer CPU cores
    N. of physical cores
    4
    â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
    Market range: <2 – >12
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (4 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    4 vs 6
  • 25.1% lower single-core score
    Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark score
    1,102
    â–¼ Worse than 71% of models
    Market range: <561 – >2.7k
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,102 vs 1,471). The average processor scores 1,471 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,102 vs 1,471
  • 4 fewer CPU threads
    CPU threads
    4
    â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
    Market range: <4 – >24
    This processor has fewer CPU threads than the average processor (4 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    4 vs 8
  • No multithreading support
    Multithreading
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
    This processor does not support multithreading, the average processor does. 74.2% of processors support multithreading.
  • 29.7% lower multi-core score
    Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
    3,396
    â–¼ Worse than 60% of models
    Market range: <763 – >14k
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (3,396 vs 4,829). The average processor scores 4,829 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    3,396 vs 4,829
  • 16.7% larger process node
    Semiconductor size
    14 nm
    â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
    Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
    This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (14 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    14 nm vs 12 nm
  • 9% lower user score
    User score
    7.3/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
    When it matters
    When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
    Score distribution
    ▼▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    Intel Core i3 8100T
    the average processor
    Intel Core i3 8100T has a lower user score than the average processor (7.34 vs 8.000).
    7.34 vs 8
  • No crypto acceleration
    Cryptographic acceleration
    AES
    â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
    This processor does not include crypto acceleration, the average processor does. 0.00% of processors include crypto acceleration.
    AES vs AES, SHA
  • 2 years older release date
    Release date
    2018
    â–¼ Worse than 62% of models
    Market range: <2k – >2k
    This processor has an older release date than the average processor (2018 vs 2020).
    February 2018
    2018 vs 2020
  • Narrower instruction support
    Instruction sets
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, BMI1, BMI2
    â–¼ Worse than 50% of models
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, BMI1, BMI2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, BMI1, BMI2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA
  • 50.2% lower PassMark score
    PassMark benchmark result
    5,268
    â–¼ Worse than 71% of models
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (5,268 vs 10,572.5). The average processor scores 10,572.5 in PassMark benchmark.
    5,268 vs 10,572.5
  • 25.5% weaker single-core performance
    PassMark single-core benchmark score
    1,863
    â–¼ Worse than 77% of models
    Market range: <1.4k – >4k
    This processor has a lower PassMark single-core score than the average processor (1,863 vs 2,500). The average processor scores 2,500 in PassMark single-core.
    1,863 vs 2,500
  • 2 fewer CPU cores
    N. of physical cores
    4
    â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
    Market range: <2 – >12
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (4 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    4 vs 6
  • 25.1% lower single-core score
    Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark score
    1,102
    â–¼ Worse than 71% of models
    Market range: <561 – >2.7k
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,102 vs 1,471). The average processor scores 1,471 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,102 vs 1,471
  • 4 fewer CPU threads
    CPU threads
    4
    â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
    Market range: <4 – >24
    This processor has fewer CPU threads than the average processor (4 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    4 vs 8
  • No multithreading support
    Multithreading
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
    This processor does not support multithreading, the average processor does. 74.2% of processors support multithreading.
  • 29.7% lower multi-core score
    Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
    3,396
    â–¼ Worse than 60% of models
    Market range: <763 – >14k
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (3,396 vs 4,829). The average processor scores 4,829 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    3,396 vs 4,829
  • 1 fewer threads per core
    Threads per core
    1
    â–¼ Worse than 70% of models
    Market range: <0 – >2.5
    This processor has fewer threads per core than the average processor (1 vs 2). The average processor offers 2 threads per core.
    1 vs 2
  • No Turbo Boost
    Turbo Boost version
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 89% of models
    This processor does not support Turbo Boost, the average processor does. 88.6% of processors support Turbo Boost.
  • 16.7% larger process node
    Semiconductor size
    14 nm
    â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
    Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
    This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (14 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    14 nm vs 12 nm
  • 50% less L2 per core
    L2 per core
    0.25 MB/core
    â–¼ Worse than 63% of models
    Market range: <0.25 MB/core – >2 MB/core
    This processor has less L2 cache per core than the average processor (0.3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    0.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 60% smaller L2 cache
    L2 cache
    1 MB
    â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
    Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
    This processor has a lower L2 cache than the average processor (1 MB vs 2.5 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 2.5 MB.
    1 MB vs 2.5 MB
  • 12.5% less L3 per core
    L3 per core
    1.5 MB/core
    â–¼ Worse than 54% of models
    Market range: <1 MB/core – >3 MB/core
    This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.5 MB/core vs 1.7 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.714 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    1.5 MB/core vs 1.714 MB/core
  • 33.3% smaller L1 cache
    L1 cache
    256 KB
    â–¼ Worse than 59% of models
    Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
    This processor has a lower L1 cache than the average processor (256 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    256 KB vs 384 KB
  • 25% smaller L3 cache
    L3 cache
    6 MB
    â–¼ Worse than 60% of models
    Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
    This processor has a lower L3 cache than the average processor (6 MB vs 8 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 8 MB.
    6 MB vs 8 MB
  • 18.1% lower memory bandwidth
    Maximum memory bandwidth
    37.5 GB/s
    â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
    Market range: <25 GB/s – >100 GB/s
    This processor has a lower memory bandwidth than the average processor (37.5 GB/s vs 45.8 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 45.8 GB/s.
    37.5 GB/s vs 45.8 GB/s
  • Lower JEDEC memory speed
    Max memory speed (JEDEC)
    DDR4-2400 MHz
    â–¼ Worse than 66% of models
    This processor has a lower JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (DDR4-2400 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    DDR4-2,400 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • 18.2% lower memory speed
    Maximum memory speed
    2,400 MHz
    â–¼ Worse than 63% of models
    Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
    This processor has a lower maximum memory speed than the average processor (2400 MHz vs 2933 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 2933 MHz.
    2,400 MHz vs 2,933 MHz
  • Narrower media codec support
    Integrated media encoders/decoders
    VC-1 (HW decode)
    â–¼ Worse than 82% of models
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (VC-1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)).
    VC-1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)
  • 18 °C lower TJ Max
    Maximum operating temperature (TJ Max)
    82 °C
    â–¼ Worse than 97% of models
    Market range: <95 °C – >105 °C
    This processor has a lower TJ Max than the average processor (82 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor has a TJ Max of 100 °C.
    82 °C vs 100 °C

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

O
openbenchmarking.org
Q1 2019
Summary of the review
Intel Core I3-8100T Benchmarks, Linux Performance
B
browser.geekbench.com
29/03/2026
Summary of the review
Intel Core i3-8100T Benchmarks - Geekbench Browser
C
cpubenchmark.net
29/01/2026
Summary of the review
Intel Core i3-8100T @ 3.10GHz - CPU Benchmarks
C
cpubenchmark.net
30/03/2026
Summary of the review
Intel i3-8100T vs i3-8100 [cpubenchmark.net] by PassMark Software
(Translated)Show original
S
smaaart.fr
15/03/2026
Summary of the review
Lenovo ThinkCentre M720q - Core i3 8100T 3.1 GHz - 8 GB RAM
(Translated)Show original
V
valid.x86.fr
15/05/2018
Summary of the review
CPU-Z Benchmark for Intel Core i3-8100T (Specs and Scores)
(Translated)Show original

Third-party reviews

Based on 20 buyer reviews from online shops.
Reviews last updated: May 2026 · How we calculate this
Read buyer reviews on Amazon →

What we like about Intel Core i3 8100T

  • Extremely power-efficient with a low 35W TDP, making it ideal for 24/7 home servers or small form factor (SFF) builds.
  • Features Intel QuickSync, which provides excellent hardware-accelerated video transcoding for applications like Plex.
  • Maintains low operating temperatures and low idle power consumption (averaging around 12W in some user setups).
  • Capable of handling general daily tasks, web surfing, and 4K video playback smoothly.
  • Supports ECC memory when paired with specific compatible motherboard chipsets, a rarity for entry-level consumer CPUs.
  • Solid performance for older or less demanding games like GTA V when paired with a dedicated GPU.

What we don't like about Intel Core i3 8100T

  • Lacks Hyper-Threading and Turbo Boost, limiting its multitasking and heavy-load performance compared to higher-tier models.
  • Low base clock frequency (3.1 GHz) makes it significantly slower than the standard i3-8100 in single-core tasks.
  • Weak integrated graphics (Intel UHD 630) struggle with modern or graphically intensive games.
  • Now considered 'old' by modern standards, often struggling with recent AAA titles or heavy production workloads.
  • Limited upgrade path without changing the motherboard, as it requires a 300-series chipset.

Verdict

The Intel Core i3-8100T is an 8th Generation Coffee Lake desktop processor featuring 4 cores and 4 threads with a base clock speed of 3.10 GHz and 6 MB of Intel Smart Cache. Built on a 14nm lithography and fitting the LGA 1151 socket, it includes integrated Intel UHD Graphics 630 and supports up to 64 GB of DDR4-2400 memory with ECC support. Its primary advantage is a low 35W TDP (configurable down to 25W), making it highly energy-efficient and ideal for small form factor PCs or quiet builds. However, it lacks Intel Turbo Boost technology, has a locked multiplier that prevents overclocking, and can struggle with modern multi-threaded workloads due to its lack of Hyper-Threading.

Compare Intel Core i3 8100T with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Intel Core i3 8100T and other processors

No results found