Intel Core i3-8300 3.7 GHz

[W1zzard]

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.

i3-8300 is 3.6 and i5-7500 is 3.4 to 3.8. Can you reliably force multiplier on locked CPU to higher than base, lower than max boost?

 

[jabbadap]

i3-8300 is 3.6 and i5-7500 is 3.4 to 3.8. Can you reliably force multiplier on locked CPU to higher than base, lower than max boost?

Well yeah, like I said I haven't touched those locked intels for ages so I really don't know for sure(i.e. can you change core clock multipliers down on z270 boards with locked processors)...

Other way is to take i5 7600k and load intel XTU, limit power to 65W, disable turbo boost and tune multipliers to 36x all core.

 

[AlwaysHope]

I don't see much point in this review, I mean isn't this whole website an enthusiasts one? How can reviewing a non overclockable chip be interesting to performance enthusiasts? 3% boost on BCLK is hardly anything.
I'm sure most of us want to see if we can get extra performance from tweaking our hardware.

 

[Fourstaff]

I don't see much point in this review, I mean isn't this whole website an enthusiasts one? How can reviewing a non overclockable chip be interesting to performance enthusiasts? 3% boost on BCLK is hardly anything.
I'm sure most of us want to see if we can get extra performance from tweaking our hardware.

A lot of enthusiasts build PCs for the greater community (friends, relatives, etc.), or just for more mundane purposes like HTPC.

 

[Caring1]

I don't see much point in this review, I mean isn't this whole website an enthusiasts one? How can reviewing a non overclockable chip be interesting to performance enthusiasts? 3% boost on BCLK is hardly anything.
I'm sure most of us want to see if we can get extra performance from tweaking our hardware.

Enthusiasts aren't necessarily overclockers, you have the sites mixed up?

 

[AlwaysHope]

Enthusiasts aren't necessarily overclockers, you have the sites mixed up?

Oh my bad, gimme a smackdown.

 

[Caring1]

Oh my bad, gimme a smackdown.

 

[bajaweber]

Any chance of adding an i3-8100 to the test results? I know that you speculate that the performance difference between an i3-8300 and its 8100 counterpart is about 6% but I'm really curious to see if that bears out in real world testing.

 

[W1zzard]

Any chance of adding an i3-8100 to the test results? I know that you speculate that the performance difference between an i3-8300 and its 8100 counterpart is about 6% but I'm really curious to see if that bears out in real world testing.

I don't have an 8100 unfortunately

 

[JF445]

Hello,

I've been researching the 8100/8300 for awhile now and can clearly say that I'd rather put a 8300 into my build versus the 8100.

Don't care to much for the 100mhz but, the bump in cache is worth it to me, we can call the 100mhz a bonus.

Seen a few videos that compare a 6MB-L3 & 8MB-L3, one video showed a 5-6 frame bump over the 6MB L3.

In our current game market, four cores are enough, 3.7Ghz is respectable and 8MB-L3 is a logical investment.

Sure it's not for everyone, some people will catch the power bug and will reach for that 8350K. Some will bump up to the i5-8400 (ideal in my mind), for the increase in cores, ram profiles and turbo boost.

Final thoughts - The 8300 is ideal for a entry-midrange build. I'll be pairing mine with a Gigabyte 1060-6GB and Gigabyte B360N WiFi for a mini ITX build.