Intel Core i3-8300 3.7 GHz

[W1zzard]

The Intel Core i3-8300 was released recently as part of Intel's second wave of Coffee Lake processors. Compared to the i3-8100, it adds 100 MHz to the CPU clock and 2 MB of cache. It lacks the unlocked multiplier of Ryzen, and its integrated graphics are not nearly as fast as those of Ryzen G models. Is it still a good option in the $150 CPU market?

Show full review

 

[dj-electric]

There should be a Zen+ based 4C\8T for about 140$ aaannnyy moment now...

 

[MDDB]

There should be a Zen+ based 4C\8T for about 140$ aaannnyy moment now...

There is already, it's called R5 2400G. But indeed, there might be a R5 2500 coming soon.

 

[dj-electric]

There is already, it's called R5 2400G. But indeed, there might be a R5 2500 coming soon.

Dont confuse Zen with Ryzen. Those are 1st gen Zen based. I'm talking about the 2500X, of course

 

[newtekie1]

Yeah, I really don't see a reason to spend the extra on this over an i3-8100. You won't notice the difference.

 

[jabbadap]

Yeah, I really don't see a reason to spend the extra on this over an i3-8100. You won't notice the difference.

Well yeah it will probably just made for filling lot's of dells, hps, lenovos etc. desktop PCs... So this uses different chip than other i3s(65W vs 62W TDP)? Have anyone in anywhere delidded it that if it's really just 14nm++ kaby lake or cut down coffee lake or do you have certain knowledge it indeed be "new" chip @W1zzard.

 

[GoldenX]

Should Intel had put the 8300 at the 8100 price, and lowered the 8100 price, it would have been a valid option. Now it makes as much sense as the 8350k.
If AMD lowers the price of the APUs, the i3 line becomes completely useless, again. Step it up Intel!

 

[newtekie1]

So this uses different chip than other i3s(65W vs 62W TDP)? Have anyone in anywhere delidded it that if it's really just 14nm++ kaby lake or cut down coffee lake or do you have certain knowledge it indeed be "new" chip @W1zzard.

This is the same chip as the i3-8100 and i3-8350K.

 

[TheLaughingMan]

Dont confuse Zen with Ryzen. Those are 1st gen Zen based. I'm talking about the 2500X, of course

I think you are confused. The refresh is Zen+ which is what the 2000 series is so the correct chip for pricing is the 2400G. The 2500X will be in a higher price bracket.

After some looking, I have to add this to the list of things I have been getting wrong today. the 2200G and 2400G are not Zen+.

 

[biffzinker]

The APU's 2200/2400 are Zen first generation not Zen+ aka second generation their only sec gen in naming.

 

[jabbadap]

This is the same chip as the i3-8100 and i3-8350K.

I kind of doubt that, it has higher clocks than i3 8100(both cpu and igpu) and in the same time lower tdp. I thought we were in consensus that the first i3s were just the 14nm+ i5s kaby lakes with "coffee lake" microcodes.

 

[Stephen.]

I think its about time intel ovahauled the whole core series of processors to something like

Mainstream
i3 - 4 Cores 8 Threads
i5 - 6 Cores 12 Threads
i7 - 8 Cores 16 Threads

Enthusiast
i9 - 10 Cores 20 Threads
and above

 

[dj-electric]

If all future HEDT CPUs will be called i9, and all start from 10C, that would actually make a lot of sense and clear some of the confusion.
There's enough confusion i see with people actually thinking the 2200G and 2400G are Zen+.
Also, i really wanna see the 2C\4T pentium part starting around the 50$ mark. That would be nice

 

[biffzinker]

There's enough confusion i see with people actually thinking the 2200G and 2400G are Zen+.

Including the reviewer.

If you plan on getting a dedicated mid-range graphics card (GTX 1060 and above), I'd probably not waste money on an IGP that's never used and stick with Intel for higher gaming performance.

But your getting a IGP with Intel whether you wanted or needed it, although with AMD EOL the similar Ryzen 3/5 in place of the 2200/2400 I guess it works out the same.

 

[jabbadap]

If all future HEDT CPUs will be called i9, and all start from 10C, that would actually make a lot of sense and clear some of the confusion.
There's enough confusion i see with people actually thinking the 2200G and 2400G are Zen+.
Also, i really wanna see the 2C\4T pentium part starting around the 50$ mark. That would be nice

You can blame AMD for that, by their naming scheme they are second generation Ryzens...

Spoiler: AMD Zen naming scheme

 

[dj-electric]

Technically, it is not incorrect. 2200G and 2400G are second gen ryzen CPUs, they are just not Zen+ based.

 

[TheGuruStud]

Another steaming pile from Intel. 2200/2400G alllll day. They don't even care to match prices, b/c dummies will buy them, regardless. At least with matched prices, it'd give a reason to buy that turd, but it's not worth it costing more. Anyone that's buying to build ought to be able to set ryzen at 4.0ghz in 2 minutes and there goes any perf lead for the dookie 3.

 

[eidairaman1]

Another steaming pile from Intel. 2200/2400G alllll day. They don't even care to match prices, b/c dummies will buy them, regardless. At least with matched prices, it'd give a reason to buy that turd, but it's not worth it costing more. Anyone that's buying to build ought to be able to set ryzen at 4.0ghz in 2 minutes and there goes any perf lead for the dookie 3.

Ime stops the i3 from ocing, no multiplier either, locked out chips lol

 

[Gungar]

This is the same chip as the i3-8100 and i3-8350K.

No, of course not the i3 8100 has less cache.

 

[moawkwrd]

Think it would be more helpful if your benchmarks still included older chips like Haswell etc. Just showing the last two generations doesn't really tell potential buyers much and whether it's worth upgrading unless they cross reference reviews themselves.

I know this may not be possible where older hardware isn't available anymore or benchmarks have changed and you can't go back and redo them, but still it's a thought.

 

[newtekie1]

I kind of doubt that, it has higher clocks than i3 8100(both cpu and igpu) and in the same time lower tdp. I thought we were in consensus that the first i3s were just the 14nm+ i5s kaby lakes with "coffee lake" microcodes.

The TDP difference is minor, and really I take TDP ratings with a very large grain of salt. I attribute the difference more to Intel marketing than anything else, but it could also just be Intel tuning Coffee Lake after the first run.

No, of course not the i3 8100 has less cache.

The i5-8400 and i7-8700 are the same chip too.

 

[jabbadap]

The TDP difference is minor, and really I take TDP ratings with a very large grain of salt. I attribute the difference more to Intel marketing than anything else, but it could also just be Intel tuning Coffee Lake after the first run.

The i5-8400 and i7-8700 are the same chip too.

No they are not, i3-8100 and i3-8350k has a Die, which have physically only four cores on it(thus they probably are just 14nm+ kaby lakes). i5s and i7s coffee lakes are different physically bigger six core die. Just compare the specs of i5s and i7s kabylake k:s and i3 3850k, don't mind that OGL 4.5 support, kaby lake igpus has that support now too with driver update. In short i3 8350k is i7 7700k with hyper-threading and turbo boost disabled. And then compare locked i5s and coffee lake i3s. i3 8100 is very much like locked kaby lake i5s and i3 8300 is that odd one out. Oh and @W1zzard if you wan't to emulate i3 8100, i5 7500 has the same 3.6 GHz all core speed as i3 8100, just lock multiplier to 3.6GHz on bios.

 

[W1zzard]

isn't 7500 3.4 to 3.8 ghz?

 

[newtekie1]

No they are not, i3-8100 and i3-8350k has a Die, which have physically only four cores on it(thus they probably are just 14nm+ kaby lakes). i5s and i7s coffee lakes are different physically bigger six core die. Just compare the specs of i5s and i7s kabylake k:s and i3 3850k, don't mind that OGL 4.5 support, kaby lake igpus has that support now too with driver update. In short i3 8350k is i7 7700k with hyper-threading and turbo boost disabled. And then compare locked i5s and coffee lake i3s. i3 8100 is very much like locked kaby lake i5s and i3 8300 is that odd one out. Oh and @W1zzard if you wan't to emulate i3 8100, i5 7500 has the same 3.6 GHz all core speed as i3 8100, just lock multiplier to 3.6GHz on bios.

No, I meant the i5-8400 and i7-8700 both use the same die as eachother despite the cache size difference, not the same die as the i3 processors. There are only two different Coffee Lake die, the 6-core with 12MB of cache and the 4 core with 8MB of cache. All the other skus are carved out of those two dies by disabling features.

My point was just because a sku has less cache doesn't mean "of course" they aren't the same chip. The i5-8400 and i7-8700 are both use the same die as eachother, but one has less cache.

 

[jabbadap]

No, I meant the i5-8400 and i7-8700 both use the same die as eachother despite the cache size difference, not the same die as the i3 processors. There are only two different Coffee Lake die, the 6-core with 12MB of cache and the 4 core with 8MB of cache. All the other skus are carved out of those two dies by disabling features.

My point was just because a sku has less cache doesn't mean "of course" they aren't the same chip. The i5-8400 and i7-8700 are both use the same die as eachother, but one has less cache.

Ahh ok, yep that is right. Well Pentiums and Celerons might actually be 2 core dies, like kaby lake i3s, pentiums and celerons were. So there's most probably three different "coffee lake" dies. I just don't believe that all six core dies are fully operational, so where are those going with one or two broken cores. And that makes me think that what if i3 8300s are actually six core die with two disabled cores.

isn't 7500 3.4 to 3.8 ghz?

Base clock is 3.4GHz, all core turbo 3.6GHz and single core turbo 3.8GHz. Haven't really messed with unlocked intels lately. But I presume it is still possible to lower the max core clock ratio. Disabling Turbo clocks from bios might do the job too, but I'm not sure if it's stays at base clocks after that.