In Atomfall, the Core i7-8700T is slightly faster than the Core i3-3210. However, it's a much worse value for money, as it's $116 more expensive!
Core i7-8700T
- Up to 11% faster in Atomfall – 208 vs 187 FPS
- Up to 11% faster in Atomfall
- Is 5 years and 2 months newer – Apr 02, 2018 vs Jan 01, 2013
- Is 5 years and 2 months newer
- Consumes up to 36% less energy – 35 vs 55 Watts
- Consumes up to 36% less energy
Core i3-3210
- Up to 42% cheaper – $159.00 vs $275.00
- Up to 42% cheaper
- Up to 36% better value in Atomfall – $0.85 vs $1.32/FPS
- Up to 36% better value in Atomfall
Atomfall FPS Calculator
Core i7-8700T vs Core i3-3210: Comparison of performance and price
Core i7-8700T
Apr 2nd, 2018
Average FPS
208 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
156 FPS
100%
Price, $
$275
57%
Value, $/FPS
$1.32/FPS
64%
Core i3-3210
Jan 1st, 2013
Average FPS
187 FPS
90%
Min 1% FPS
140 FPS
90%
Price, $
$159
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.85/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i7-8700T vs Core i3-3210 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i7-8700T vs Core i3-3210 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i7-8700T
Apr 2nd, 2018
Cores
6-core
100%
L3 Cache
12 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.4 GHz
75%
Turbo Frequency
4 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2666 MHz
100%
Core i3-3210
Jan 1st, 2013
Cores
2-core
33%
L3 Cache
3 MB
25%
Base Frequency
3.2 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i7-8700T Apr 2nd, 2018 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i3-3210 Jan 1st, 2013 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Apr 2nd, 2018 | Released | Jan 1st, 2013 |
| – | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1151 | Socket | LGA1155 |
35 W | Power Consumption | 55 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2666 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | DDR3 |
| UHD Graphics 630 | Integrated GPU | Intel HD 2500 |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
