OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

Intel Core i5-8300H review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£210PassMark multi-core score:7365N. of physical cores:4CPU boost clock speed:4.0 GHzCPU socket:FCBGA1440TDP (Thermal design power):45 W

Intel Core i5-8300H Review: Compare 74 technical specifications and 2 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

6.3/10

Overall score

Score
6.3/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 65% of models
Score components

40%

4.4

Technical score

25%

7.6

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.0, the mark of a weaker model in this category

▼Worse than 65% of processors
7.2

Value for money

Value for money
7.2/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 60% of models
Score components

70%

6.3

Overall score

30%

9.4

Price

▼Worse than 60%
4.4

Technical score

Technical score
4.4/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 73% of models
Score components

60%

3.6

Performance

18%

4.9

Architecture

10%

5.4

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.2

Power & Thermal

4%

7.6

Platform

1%

6.6

Integrated graphics

▼Worse than 73%
7.6

Reviews score

Reviews score
7.6/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 50% of models

80%

7.9

Average grade

20%

6.5

Popularity

Grades by review (2)
2 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
▲Better than 50%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £210
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 i5-8300H

Technical score
Technical score
4.4/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 73% of models
Score components:

60%

3.6

Performance

18%

4.9

Architecture

10%

5.4

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.2

Power & Thermal

4%

7.6

Platform

1%

6.6

Integrated graphics

4.4
Reviews score
7.6
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.2/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 60% of models
Score components:

70%

6.3

Overall score

30%

9.4

Price

7.2
Processor type
mobile
This processor belongs to the mobile processor class, which is more advanced than that of 6.9% of processors and equal to that of 47.7% of processors.
CPU socket
FCBGA1440
This processor uses the FCBGA1440 CPU socket, which is older than that of 82.6% of processors and equal to that of 4.5% of processors.
Chipset
Z370, Q370, H370, B365, B360, H310
This processor supports Z370, Q370, H370, B365, B360, H310 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 56.8% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, CLMUL, BMI1, BMI2
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, CLMUL, BMI1, BMI2 instruction sets, which is broader support than 77.1% of processors and equal to that of 0.4% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
4
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 4 CPU cores, which is fewer than 52.8% of processors and equal to 27.5% of processors.
CPU threads
8
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 8 CPU threads, which is more than 33.4% of processors and equal to 18.8% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4 GHz which is lower than that of 62.1% of processors and equal to that of 4.8% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
4x 2.3 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 4x2.3 GHz which is lower than that of 70.3% of processors and equal to that of 1.4% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
7,365
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 7,365 in PassMark, which is lower than 61.4% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
14 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 14 nm process node, which is older than that of 52% of processors and equal to that of 32.9% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 14 nm
This processor is built on the Intel 14 nm foundry process, which is less advanced than that of 55.9% of processors and equal to that of 29% of processors.
L3 cache
8 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 8 MB which is smaller than that of 50.7% of processors and equal to that of 11.5% of processors.
L2 cache
1 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 1 MB which is smaller than that of 68.3% of processors and equal to that of 17% of processors.
L1 cache
256 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 256 KB which is smaller than that of 60.4% of processors and equal to that of 18.1% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4/LPDDR3
This processor supports DDR DDR4/LPDDR3, which is newer than that of 56.3% of processors and equal to that of 1.9% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
2,666 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 2,666 MHz, which is lower than that of 56.7% of processors and equal to 7.9% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
?
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
64 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 64 GB of memory, which is more than 27.2% of processors and equal to 26.1% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
Intel UHD Graphics 630
This processor uses the Intel UHD Graphics 630 integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 45.6% of processors and equal to that in 8% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
24
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 24 GPU execution units, which is more than 49.1% of processors and equal to 20.8% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
350 MHz
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 350 MHz which is higher than that of 42.7% of processors and equal to that of 25.4% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
VP8 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode/encode), VC-1 (HW decode)
This processor supports VP8 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode/encode), VC-1 (HW decode) media codecs, which is narrower support than 59.2% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
45 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 45 W which is lower than that of 41.9% of processors and equal to that of 10.8% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
45 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 45 W which is lower than that of 41.9% of processors and equal to that of 11% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
?
Tau (power duration limit)
28 seconds
Market range: <8 seconds – >28 seconds
This processor has a turbo duration of 28 seconds which is longer than that of 4.4% of processors and equal to that of 85.3% of processors.
Configurable TDP
yes
This processor supports configurable TDP. 46.4% of processors offer this.
cTDP: 35 W
Show more

Intel Core i5-8300H vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 13.4% higher review score
    Reviews score
    7.6/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▲ Better than 50% of models

    80%

    7.9

    Average grade

    20%

    6.5

    Popularity

    Grades by review (2)
    2 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    7.6 vs 6.7
  • 28.8% smaller die size
    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
  • 37.4% faster Blender rendering
    This processor has a lower Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (546.9 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    546.9 vs 398.015
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR4/LPDDR3 vs DDR4).
    DDR4/LPDDR3 vs DDR4
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Coffee Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Coffee Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 8.1% more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 13.4% higher review score
    Reviews score
    7.6/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▲ Better than 50% of models

    80%

    7.9

    Average grade

    20%

    6.5

    Popularity

    Grades by review (2)
    2 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    7.6 vs 6.7
  • 37.4% faster Blender rendering
    This processor has a lower Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (546.9 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    546.9 vs 398.015
  • 28.8% smaller die size
    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
  • 8.1% more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Coffee Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Coffee Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR4/LPDDR3 vs DDR4).
    DDR4/LPDDR3 vs DDR4
  • 2 fewer CPU cores
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (4 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    4 vs 6
  • 35.8% lower PassMark score
    This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (7,365 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    7,365 vs 11,469
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, MPX, OS Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, MPX, OS Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • 9.1% lower boost clock
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (4 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 39.8% weaker multi-core performance
    This processor has a lower multi-core performance than the average processor (1,689 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    1,689 vs 2,804.5
  • 19% lower Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a lower Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (397 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    397 vs 490
  • 17.5% lower single-core score
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,266 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,266 vs 1,535
  • 66.7% smaller L2 cache
    This processor has a lower L2 cache than the average processor (1 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    1 MB vs 3 MB
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, MPX, OS Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, MPX, OS Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Older CPU socket
    This processor uses an older CPU socket than the average processor (FCBGA1440 vs FP5).
    FCBGA1440 vs FP5
  • More limited crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more limited crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES vs AES, SHA).
    AES vs AES, SHA
  • 2 years older release date
    This processor has an older release date than the average processor (2018 vs 2020).
    April 2018
    2018 vs 2020
  • 2 fewer CPU cores
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (4 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    4 vs 6
  • 35.8% lower PassMark score
    This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (7,365 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    7,365 vs 11,469
  • 9.1% lower boost clock
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (4 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 39.8% weaker multi-core performance
    This processor has a lower multi-core performance than the average processor (1,689 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    1,689 vs 2,804.5
  • 19% lower Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a lower Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (397 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    397 vs 490
  • 27.9% lower multi-core score
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (3,754 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    3,754 vs 5,209
  • 17.5% lower single-core score
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,266 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,266 vs 1,535
  • 12.4% weaker single-core performance
    This processor has a lower PassMark single-core score than the average processor (2,242 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    2,242 vs 2,558
  • Lower base clock
    This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (4x2.3 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    4x2.3 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 32% slower classroom rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (231.3 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    231.29 vs 340.075
  • 66.7% smaller L2 cache
    This processor has a lower L2 cache than the average processor (1 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    1 MB vs 3 MB
  • 16.7% larger process node
    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
    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
  • 33.3% smaller L1 cache
    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
  • 16.7% lower memory speed
    This processor has a lower maximum memory speed than the average processor (2,666 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    2,666 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (VP8 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode/encode), VC-1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    VP8 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode/encode), VC-1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)

Video reviews

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

8.0
Jarrod'sTech
≈ estimated
13/06/2019
Comparison · benchmarks against Ryzen 7 3750H
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-8300H clearly leads on raw performance, though it runs hotter and draws more power.
9.0
Summersmedia
≈ estimated
23/12/2018
Owner's impressions · gaming and streaming use
Verdict
Intel Core i5-8300H is a very good gaming processor, as long as heavy background tasks stay light.
Not graded
Overview video
Not graded
Overview video
Not graded
Not graded
Shop video

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Core i5-8300H

  • Significant performance jump (30-40%) over previous generations like the i5-7300HQ due to Hyper-Threading.
  • Excellent value for money, often matching the performance of pricier, older i7 processors (e.g., i7-7700HQ).
  • Capable of handling multitasking, modern entry-level gaming, and light workstation tasks like 3D rendering.
  • Maintains high Turbo Boost frequencies (up to 4.0 GHz) compared to U-series low-voltage chips.
  • Solid reliability for daily activities and office suites even years after launch.

What customers don't like about Intel Core i5-8300H

  • Prone to high operating temperatures, frequently reaching 90°C–100°C under heavy load.
  • Susceptible to thermal throttling if the laptop cooling solution is inadequate.
  • High power consumption (45W TDP) significantly impacts battery life compared to U-series alternatives.
  • Limited future-proofing for high-end gaming or intensive modern workstation loads.
  • Multiplier is locked, which restricts any potential for overclocking to improve performance.

Verdict

The Intel Core i5-8300H is a high-performance quad-core mobile processor based on the 8th Gen Coffee Lake-H architecture, featuring 4 cores, 8 threads via Hyper-Threading, and 8 MB of Smart Cache. Operating with a 45W TDP, it offers a base clock speed of 2.3 GHz and a maximum Turbo Boost frequency of 4.0 GHz, supporting up to 64 GB of dual-channel DDR4-2666 memory and integrated Intel UHD Graphics 630. Main pros include a significant performance leap over its predecessor (i5-7300HQ) due to doubled thread count, making it a strong entry-level choice for gaming and multimedia workstations. However, notable cons include high power consumption and a tendency to run hot, often requiring robust cooling solutions to avoid thermal throttling under heavy loads.

Compare Intel Core i5-8300H 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 i5-8300H and other processors

No results found