Core i3-10325 vs Core i7-8700T

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Core i3-10325 vs Core i7-8700T FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core i3-10325 vs Core i7-8700T: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core i3-10325

2021

Why buy it

✅Costs $149 less on MSRP ($154 MSRP vs $303 MSRP).
✅Delivers 98.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 66.8 vs 33.7 PassMark/$ ($154 MSRP vs $303 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 12 MB).
❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.

Core i7-8700T

2018

Why buy it

✅+50% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB).
✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (10,213 vs 10,291).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 33.7 vs 66.8 PassMark/$ ($303 MSRP vs $154 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-10325 better than Core i7-8700T?

Yes. Core i3-10325 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.8% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i3-10325 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.4% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-10325 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.8% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 8 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core i3-10325 is the better buy right now. Core i3-10325 comes in $149 cheaper on MSRP at $154 MSRP versus $303 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 98.3% better value on MSRP (66.8 vs 33.7 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core i3-10325 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2021 vs 2018) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 8 threads instead of 6/12. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core i3-10325 vs Core i7-8700T Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core i3-10325

The Core i3-10325 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 16 March 2021 (4 years ago). It is based on the Comet Lake-R (2021) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.9 GHz, with boost up to 4.7 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1200. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2666. Passmark benchmark score: 10,291 points. Launch price was $154.

Core i7-8700T

The Core i7-8700T is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2 April 2018 (7 years ago). It is based on the Coffee Lake (2017−2019) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2666. Passmark benchmark score: 10,213 points. Launch price was $303.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i3-10325 packs 4 cores / 8 threads, while the Core i7-8700T offers 6 cores / 12 threads — the Core i7-8700T has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.7 GHz on the Core i3-10325 versus 4 GHz on the Core i7-8700T — a 16.1% clock advantage for the Core i3-10325 (base: 3.9 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The Core i3-10325 uses the Comet Lake-R (2021) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i7-8700T uses Coffee Lake (2017−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-10325 scores 10,291 against the Core i7-8700T's 10,213 — a 0.8% lead for the Core i3-10325. L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Core i3-10325 vs 12 MB (total) on the Core i7-8700T.

Feature	Core i3-10325	Core i7-8700T
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	6 / 12+50%
Boost Clock	4.7 GHz+18%	4 GHz
Base Clock	3.9 GHz+63%	2.4 GHz
L3 Cache	8 MB (total)	12 MB (total)+50%
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	256K (per core)
Process	14 nm	14 nm
Architecture	Comet Lake-R (2021)	Coffee Lake (2017−2019)
PassMark	10,291	10,213

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-10325 uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i7-8700T uses LGA1151 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i3-10325	Core i7-8700T
Socket	LGA1200	LGA1151
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core i3-10325 was priced at $154, while the Core i7-8700T came in at $303. On launch pricing ($154 vs $303), Core i3-10325 was $149 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i3-10325 delivers 66.8 pts/$ vs 33.7 pts/$ for the Core i7-8700T — making the Core i3-10325 the 65.9% better value option.

Feature	Core i3-10325	Core i7-8700T
MSRP	$154-49%	$303
Performance per Dollar	66.8+98%	33.7
Release Date	2021	2018

Search Core i3-10325 on Amazon

Search Core i7-8700T on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.