Core i3-6102E vs Core m5-6Y57

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 i3-6102E vs Core m5-6Y57 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 i3-6102E vs Core m5-6Y57: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i3-6102E

2015

Why buy it

✅+0.3% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $56 less on MSRP ($225 MSRP vs $281 MSRP).
✅Delivers 25.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 10.4 vs 8.3 PassMark/$ ($225 MSRP vs $281 MSRP).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 530, while Core m5-6Y57 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (3 MB vs 4 MB).
❌455.6% higher power demand at 25W vs 4.5W.

Core m5-6Y57

2015

Why buy it

✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB).
✅Draws 5W instead of 25W, a 21W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,342 vs 2,349).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 8.3 vs 10.4 PassMark/$ ($281 MSRP vs $225 MSRP).
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-6102E can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-6102E better than Core m5-6Y57?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core m5-6Y57 is ahead with a 0.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-6102E pulls ahead with 0.3% better PassMark. Core m5-6Y57 also has the bigger cache pool with 33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-6102E is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Core i3-6102E is the better buy right now. Core i3-6102E comes in $56 cheaper on MSRP at $225 MSRP versus $281 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.3% better PassMark. The compromise is that Core m5-6Y57 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 0.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 25.3% better value on MSRP (10.4 vs 8.3 PassMark/$), 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 i3-6102E makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core i3-6102E vs Core m5-6Y57 Technical Specifications

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

Core i3-6102E

The Core i3-6102E is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 12 October 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Max frequency: 1.9 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Thermal design power (TDP): 25 Watt. Memory support: LPDDR3-1866. Passmark benchmark score: 2,349 points. Launch price was $225.

Core m5-6Y57

The Core m5-6Y57 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Skylake-Y (2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.1 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1515. Thermal design power (TDP): 4.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,342 points. Launch price was $281.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core i3-6102E and Core m5-6Y57 share an identical 2-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.9 GHz on the Core i3-6102E versus 2.8 GHz on the Core m5-6Y57 — a 38.3% clock advantage for the Core m5-6Y57. The Core i3-6102E uses the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Core m5-6Y57 uses Skylake-Y (2015) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-6102E scores 2,349 against the Core m5-6Y57's 2,342 — a 0.3% lead for the Core i3-6102E. L3 cache: 3 MB on the Core i3-6102E vs 4 MB (total) on the Core m5-6Y57.

Feature	Core i3-6102E	Core m5-6Y57
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	2 / 4
Boost Clock	1.9 GHz	2.8 GHz+47%
Base Clock	—	1.1 GHz
L3 Cache	3 MB	4 MB (total)+33%
L2 Cache	512 kB+100%	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm	14 nm
Architecture	Skylake (2015−2016)	Skylake-Y (2015)
PassMark	2,349	2,342

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i3-6102E) / not specified (Core m5-6Y57). The Core i3-6102E includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 530), while the Core m5-6Y57 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-6102E targets Embedded.

Feature	Core i3-6102E	Core m5-6Y57
Integrated GPU	Yes	—
IGPU Model	HD Graphics 530	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	—
Target Use	Embedded	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core i3-6102E was priced at $225, while the Core m5-6Y57 came in at $281. On launch pricing ($225 vs $281), Core i3-6102E was $56 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i3-6102E delivers 10.4 pts/$ vs 8.3 pts/$ for the Core m5-6Y57 — making the Core i3-6102E the 22.4% better value option.

Feature	Core i3-6102E	Core m5-6Y57
MSRP	$225-20%	$281
Performance per Dollar	10.4+25%	8.3
Release Date	2015	2015

Search Core i3-6102E on Amazon

Search Core m5-6Y57 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.