In The Last of Us Part II, the Core i3-7100T is slightly slower than the FX-8300. However, it's a much better value for money, as it's $81 cheaper!
Core i3-7100T
- Is 4 years and 2 months newer – Jan 03, 2017 vs Oct 23, 2012
- Is 4 years and 2 months newer
- Up to 76% cheaper – $25.00 vs $106.06
- Up to 76% cheaper
- Up to 76% better value in The Last of Us Part II – $0.13 vs $0.54/FPS
- Up to 76% better value in The Last of Us Part II
- Consumes up to 63% less energy – 35 vs 95 Watts
- Consumes up to 63% less energy
FX-8300
- Up to 8% faster in The Last of Us Part II – 196 vs 181 FPS
- Up to 8% faster in The Last of Us Part II
The Last of Us Part II FPS Calculator
Core i3-7100T vs FX-8300: Comparison of performance and price
Core i3-7100T
Jan 3rd, 2017
Average FPS
181 FPS
92%
Min 1% FPS
136 FPS
93%
Price, $
$25
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.13/FPS
100%
FX-8300
Oct 23rd, 2012
Average FPS
196 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
147 FPS
100%
Price, $
$106.06
23%
Value, $/FPS
$0.54/FPS
24%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i3-7100T vs FX-8300 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i3-7100T vs FX-8300 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i3-7100T
Jan 3rd, 2017
Cores
2-core
25%
L3 Cache
3 MB
38%
Base Frequency
3.4 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2400 MHz
100%
FX-8300
Oct 23rd, 2012
Cores
8-core
100%
L3 Cache
8 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.3 GHz
97%
Turbo Frequency
3.9 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1866 MHz
78%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i3-7100T Jan 3rd, 2017 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | FX-8300 Oct 23rd, 2012 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Jan 3rd, 2017 | Released | Oct 23rd, 2012 |
| – | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1151 | Socket | AM3+ |
35 W | Power Consumption | 95 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2400 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | 1866 MHz (DDR3) |
| Intel HD 630 | Integrated GPU | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
