i3-6102E vs i5-2300
Aggregate performance score
Core i5-2300 outperforms Core i3-6102E by a considerable 47% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core i5-2300 and Core i3-6102E processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1838 | 2147 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.29 | 0.09 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Core i3 |
| Power efficiency | 2.16 | 5.58 |
| Architecture codename | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) | Skylake (2015−2016) |
| Release date | 9 January 2011 (13 years ago) | 12 October 2015 (9 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $168 | $225 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
i5-2300 has 222% better value for money than i3-6102E.
Detailed specifications
Core i5-2300 and Core i3-6102E basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2.8 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3.1 GHz | 1.9 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 3.0 |
| Bus rate | 5 GT/s | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 19 |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 6144 KB (shared) | 3 MB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 216 mm2 | 98.57 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 73 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,160 million | 1750 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Core i5-2300 and Core i3-6102E compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | LGA1155 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 25 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i5-2300 and Core i3-6102E. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 2.0 | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| TSX | - | + |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Flex Memory Access | + | no data |
| FDI | + | no data |
| Fast Memory Access | + | no data |
Security technologies
Core i5-2300 and Core i3-6102E technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
| Identity Protection | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i5-2300 and Core i3-6102E are enumerated here.
| VT-d | - | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i5-2300 and Core i3-6102E. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | LPDDR3-1866 |
| Maximum memory size | 32 GB | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 21 GB/s | 34.134 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Intel HD Graphics 2000 | Intel HD Graphics 530 |
| Quick Sync Video | + | - |
| Clear Video HD | + | no data |
| Graphics max frequency | 1.1 GHz | no data |
| InTru 3D | + | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Core i5-2300 and Core i3-6102E integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 2 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i5-2300 and Core i3-6102E.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 16 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.25 | 1.53 |
| Integrated graphics card | 0.55 | 2.59 |
| Recency | 9 January 2011 | 12 October 2015 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 25 Watt |
i5-2300 has a 47.1% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores.
i3-6102E, on the other hand, has 370.9% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 4 years, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 280% lower power consumption.
The Core i5-2300 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i3-6102E in performance tests.
Note that Core i5-2300 is a desktop processor while Core i3-6102E is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i5-2300 and Core i3-6102E, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
