Core i3-3220 vs Core i7-6900K
Aggregate performance score
i7-6900K outperforms i3-3220 by a whopping 541% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core i7-6900K and Core i3-3220 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 770 | 2088 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 62 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 5.76 | 0.22 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | no data | Intel Core i3 (Desktop) |
| Architecture codename | Broadwell-E (2016) | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) |
| Release date | 31 May 2016 (8 years ago) | 8 April 2012 (12 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $1,020 | $117 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
i7-6900K has 2518% better value for money than i3-3220.
Detailed specifications
Core i7-6900K and Core i3-3220 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 | 8 (Octa-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 16 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 3.2 GHz | 3.3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.7 GHz | 3.3 GHz |
| L1 cache | 32 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 256 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 20 MB (shared) | 3 MB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 22 nm |
| Die size | no data | 94 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 67 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 72 °C | 65 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | Yes | No |
Compatibility
Information on Core i7-6900K and Core i3-3220 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 |
| Socket | 2011-3 | FCLGA1155 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 140 Watt | 55 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-6900K and Core i3-3220. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | no data |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
Security technologies
Core i7-6900K and Core i3-3220 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-6900K and Core i3-3220 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-6900K and Core i3-3220. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 25.6 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel HD Graphics 2500 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-6900K and Core i3-3220.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 40 | no data |
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.
Core i7-6900K outperforms Core i3-3220 by 541% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Core i7-6900K outperforms Core i3-3220 by 539% in Passmark.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Core i7-6900K outperforms Core i3-3220 by 140% in GeekBench 5 Single-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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Core i7-6900K outperforms Core i3-3220 by 557% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
3DMark Fire Strike Physics
Benchmark coverage: 4%
Core i7-6900K outperforms Core i3-3220 by 566% in 3DMark Fire Strike Physics.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 9.36 | 1.46 |
| Recency | 31 May 2016 | 8 April 2012 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 2 |
| Threads | 16 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 140 Watt | 55 Watt |
i7-6900K has a 541.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 57.1% more advanced lithography process.
i3-3220, on the other hand, has 154.5% lower power consumption.
The Core i7-6900K is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i3-3220 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-6900K and Core i3-3220, 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.
