Intel Core i3-10300

[W1zzard]

The Intel Core i3-10300 rewards you with 2 MB of additional L3 cache and higher clocks for $20 over the Core i3-10100. Is the upgrade worth it? In our Core i3-10300 review we'll also check if the more affordable AMD Ryzen 3 3300X is the better choice.

Show full review

 

[Bee9]

Good job mate. This CPU is too bloody expensive. Not worth the money at all.

 

[vlad.coolish]

All these tests not valid without Civilization VI AI benchmark

 

[mainlate]

Comet Lake-S processors does not support Intel® Transactional Synchronization Extensions, according to Intel´s Ark. I red somewhere it is prerequisite for Zombieload v2 vulnerability, but not sure about this. And Rocket Lake removes SGX, but if AMD/NVidia can do Playready 3.0 on GPU maybe Intel´s Xe can also (if Intel´s current implementation uses SGX at all).

 

[Joss]

Why didn't you post a pic of the included cooler?

 

[W1zzard]

Why didn't you post a pic of the included cooler?

Because I bought a tray CPU, without bundled cooler. The boxed ones aren't available here yet

 

[cucker tarlson]

very good for a 4/8 part

but it needs an -F version at $120 and a mid-range platform that supports ddr4 xmp

 

[Melvis]

very good for a 4/8 part

but it needs an -F version at $120 and a mid-range platform that supports ddr4 xmp

No one games at 720P with a 2080Ti, so the 1.1% Performance difference in games is nothing to right home about.

 

[cucker tarlson]

No one games at 720P with a 2080Ti, so the 1.1% Performance difference in games is nothing to right home about.

that's how testing is done
no one tests cpus in games at 1440p

 

[HenrySomeone]

No one games at 720P with a 2080Ti, so the 1.1% Performance difference in games is nothing to right home about.

Actually, many CS:GO pros do, but that's beside the point, many more however play at 1080p or 1440p with optimized settings to hit as close to 144/165/200/240 fps as possible (and it's a generally prudent thing to do as differences between high and ultra are often very minor and not worth the framerate hit at all). Otherwise I agree with Cucker that this needs an F version as in cases where the igpu comes in handy (office/multimedia rigs), the 10100 is just as good.

 

[cucker tarlson]

doesn't matter who does what at what resolutioon.doesn't matter at all.
it's how testing is supposed to be done (or at least it's one of the approaches)
same goes for ANY OTHER cpu test in the review,they are always set up so that the CPU is the limiting factor.

 

[yeeeeman]

After reading all three reviews of 10700, 10500 and 10300, I can conclude that performance wise they are pretty well setup, minus the 10300 which should have been a bit better (3300x is 6% better in CPU tests overall). Power consumption wise, they are pretty impressive with all three matching or being a tad lower in power consumption compared to 3700x, 3600 and 3300x respectively. What isn't right is the price and sure, these chips give you iGPU, whereas Ryzen parts don't.
So lets see what the prices of "F" versions will be, if there will be such versions. Judging by the official pricing of 300$ for 10700f vs 340$ for 10700, we can expect some 30-40$ lower prices for the F versions. So the 10300f should be ~120$, 10500f should be ~170$ so they should match pretty well with the prices of 3300x (125$) and 3600 (175$).

 

[HenrySomeone]

I'm pretty sure there won't be a 10500f and also no 10300f, only 10100f eventually

 

[ppn]

if intel released 10100F now, that would just disrupt the market for 10600. It would be just too good at $99, perfectly fits H410 $59 and 1660S. 2060S even.

 

[skaldic]

Most people will use this with CPU with 2666 Mhz ram which makes it 12 % slower in games. You need to be crazy to pair this i3 with a z490, even if you plan to later upgrade to a more powerful CPU.

 

[W1zzard]

Most people will use this with CPU with 2666 Mhz ram which makes it 12 % slower in games. You need to be crazy to pair this i3 with a z490, even if you plan to later upgrade to a more powerful CPU.

6% at 1080p

 

[skaldic]

6% at 1080p

Right. I'm wondering how the frame rate times are with slower 2666Mhz RAM.

 

[W1zzard]

Right. I'm wondering how the frame rate times are with slower 2666Mhz RAM.

Obviously lower, but I don't have frametime data. Should follow the average FPS very closely, I'm not seeing a reason why such a (relatively small) drop in memory speed should cause hitches, it's not like you're going from 4 cores to 2.

 

[heflys20]

These price points make most of this line up almost moot, IMHO. I can only imagine what'll happen if supply issues arise. I guess I'm more impressed by the fact that Intel has managed to keep this platform somewhat relevant/competitive.

 

[wolfsen]

This CPU is like most other 11th gen CPUs crippled by H460/Z490 sockets, they are unable to compete with B450/B550 in term of price/performance ratio which makes only high end CPUs worth buying on very specific tasks like some games or applications where Intel CPUs can be significantly better than the best AMD Cpu+motherboard (and you have to take into account that you have to buy a cooler on some Intel cpus) you can get for the same price.

150$ on this cpu+ 160$ for the cheapest µATX Z490= $310 while you can get a 3600+a decent ATX B450 MB for $180+100=$280 with the same gaming performance, 2 extra cores and much better performance for almost anything else (from simply unzipping files and setting up games to studying/working applications).

 

[Bee9]

that's how testing is done
no one tests cpus in games at 1440p

At lower resolution, we don't have GPU limit. That's best to test the CPU power.
However, in mu opinion, since no one is using the 720p, then it renders the test unrealistic...
I took all game tests with 2080TI with a grain of salt because there are too few people using that overpriced GPU.

150$ on this cpu+ 160$ for the cheapest µATX Z490= $310 while you can get a 3600+a decent ATX B450 MB for $180+100=$280 with the same gaming performance, 2 extra cores and much better performance for almost anyting else (from simply unzipping files and setting up games to studying/working applications).

As W1zzard said, this CPU is too expensive and there are better options.

 

[cucker tarlson]

well,2080Ti now is xx70 next gen

 

[Melvis]

that's how testing is done
no one tests cpus in games at 1440p

Naaa its completely irrelevant, most reviewers have removed this rez because its not represented as a real life scenario, its not 2005 anymore.
Incorrect, most test now are done on exactly that res and or 1080P because it represents a real life case as no one games at 720P, this has been discussed many many times over the years and is why it mostly has been removed from reviews. Eg: hardware Unboxed has completely removed it from there testing because of this exact scenario.

 

[cucker tarlson]

really,who cares about what hwunboxed did,another yt channel that plays for their viewer base.they're schvitzing to keep their subscribers comfortable since they're the ones that recommeneded them the hardware.like adding 40 dollars worth to 3600 value for the wraith spire but nothing to intel 9600k for the igpu.they're not a bad channel,it's just plain to see their strategy for likes and subscribers,like every god damn yt channel.
if you're gonna do 1080p only,you gotta spend more time picking cpu bound scenes.
and you're gonna end up with basically the same thing as 720p since you're both cpu limited - or you should be in a cpu test.
hwunboxed,which you claimed is so much better,came up with essentially the same results,10400 matching 3700x
so you are incorrect.720p is representative of what you're gonna get with a cpu bound scene at higher resolutions despite this res itself is not representative of what ppl use.

 

[Melvis]

The fact of the matter is that the community ultimately decided if it was useful or not, not hardware unboxed, you can go bashing them as much as you like but in the end your actually only bashing the people that use a PC/Viewers.

Heck if you think that 720P is so "useful" in 2020 a tech from 2005 then lets just make all reviews get rid of 1080P/1440P/4K and bring in 420P and 240P, then lets see if you or others think its "useful" in 2020, see my point?

I can list plenty more online reviews that removed 720P, its been proven time and time again its no realistic! just like having Super Pi which should of died out from benchmarks over 10yrs ago.

Get with the times already!