Core i3-6167U vs Core i5-6360U

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 i3-6167U vs Core i5-6360U 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 i3-6167U vs Core i5-6360U: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i3-6167U

2015

Why buy it

✅+0.5% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 28W instead of 512W, a 484W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (3 MB vs 4 MB).

Core i5-6360U

2015

Why buy it

✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,112 vs 3,128).
❌1728.6% higher power demand at 512W vs 28W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-6167U better than Core i5-6360U?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core i5-6360U is ahead with a 0.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-6167U pulls ahead with 0.5% better PassMark. Core i5-6360U 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 i3-6167U is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.5% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Core i3-6167U still makes the most sense overall. Core i3-6167U comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.5% better PassMark.

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

Core i3-6167U 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 i3-6167U vs Core i5-6360U Technical Specifications

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

Core i3-6167U

The Core i3-6167U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 2.7 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1356. Thermal design power (TDP): 28 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 3,128 points. Launch price was $304.

Core i5-6360U

The Core i5-6360U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 3.1 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1356. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 3,112 points. Launch price was $304.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core i3-6167U and Core i5-6360U share an identical 2-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.7 GHz on the Core i3-6167U versus 3.1 GHz on the Core i5-6360U — a 13.8% clock advantage for the Core i5-6360U (base: 2.7 GHz vs 2 GHz). Both are built on the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture using a 14 nm process. In PassMark, the Core i3-6167U scores 3,128 against the Core i5-6360U's 3,112 — a 0.5% lead for the Core i3-6167U. L3 cache: 3 MB on the Core i3-6167U vs 4 MB on the Core i5-6360U.

Feature	Core i3-6167U	Core i5-6360U
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.7 GHz	3.1 GHz+15%
Base Clock	2.7 GHz+35%	2 GHz
L3 Cache	3 MB	4 MB+33%
L2 Cache	512 kB	512 kB
Process	14 nm	14 nm
Architecture	Skylake (2015−2016)	Skylake (2015−2016)
PassMark	3,128	3,112