Core i3-8300 vs Core i5-3230M
Aggregate performance score
i3-8300 outperforms i5-3230M by a whopping 145% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core i5-3230M and Core i3-8300 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2032 | 1383 |
| Place by popularity | 90 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 6.03 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Core i5 | Intel Core i3 |
| Architecture codename | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) | Coffee Lake (2017−2019) |
| Release date | 1 January 2013 (11 years ago) | 2 April 2018 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $225 | $138 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Core i5-3230M and Core i3-8300 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.2 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 3.0 |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 37 |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 256 KB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 3 MB | 8 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 118 mm2 | 126 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 72 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Core i5-3230M and Core i3-8300 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 | FCPGA988 | 1151 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 62 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i5-3230M and Core i3-8300. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i5-3230M and Core i3-8300 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | no data |
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i5-3230M and Core i3-8300. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4 Dual-channel |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 38.397 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Intel HD Graphics 4000 | Intel UHD Graphics 630 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i5-3230M and Core i3-8300.
| PCIe version | no data | 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.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.66 | 4.07 |
| Integrated graphics card | 1.18 | 3.09 |
| Recency | 1 January 2013 | 2 April 2018 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 62 Watt |
i5-3230M has 77.1% lower power consumption.
i3-8300, on the other hand, has a 145.2% higher aggregate performance score, 161.9% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 5 years, 100% more physical cores, and a 57.1% more advanced lithography process.
The Core i3-8300 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i5-3230M in performance tests.
Be aware that Core i5-3230M is a notebook processor while Core i3-8300 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i5-3230M and Core i3-8300, 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.
