Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — Core i3-10320 outperforms the more expensive Core i7-6900K on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck! The better performing Core i3-10320 is 1430 days newer than the more expensive Core i7-6900K.
Advantages of Intel Core i3-10320
- Performs up to 2% better in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt than Core i7-6900K - 169 vs 165 FPS
- Up to 20% cheaper than Core i7-6900K - €151.33 vs €188.88
- Up to 21% better value when playing The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt than Core i7-6900K - €0.9 vs €1.14 per FPS
- Consumes up to 54% less energy than Intel Core i7-6900K - 65 vs 140 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i7-6900K doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Core i7-6900K
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i3-10320 - 16 vs 8 threads
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra+
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
169
100%
Value, €/FPS
€0.9/FPS
100%
Price, €
€151.33
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for €151.33 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 11999 minutes ago
Buy for €188.88 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 12000 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra+
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Desktop • May 31st, 2016
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i3-10320 | vs | Intel Core i7-6900K |
---|---|---|
Apr 30th, 2020 | Release Date | May 31st, 2016 |
Core i3 | Collection | Core i7 |
Comet Lake | Codename | Broadwell-E |
Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 8 |
8 | Threads | 16 |
3.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.2 GHz |
4.6 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.7 GHz |
65 W | TDP | 140 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
38.0x | Multiplier | 32.0x |
UHD Graphics 630 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |