Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
Some links on this page are affiliate links: if you buy through them we may earn a commission, at no extra cost to you.
Verdict: In AnandTech’s August 8, 2016 comparison, the Core i3-6100 was the value pick, while the i3-6320 was the fastest of these three Skylake chips. The i3-6300 sat between them, but its small performance lead over the i3-6100 was worth paying for only if the price gap was small. In 2026, these are discontinued, two-core processors: consider one mainly for a compatible system you already own, not as a default choice for a new build.
Three close relatives, one clear value winner
AnandTech’s review compared three entry-level Skylake desktop processors: the Intel Core i3-6320, i3-6300 and i3-6100. All have two physical cores, four threads through Hyper-Threading, and a stated 51 W thermal design power (TDP). Their main differences are small clock steps and the i3-6100’s smaller L3 cache.
| Processor | Cores / threads | Base clock | L3 cache | Rated TDP | Integrated graphics |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Core i3-6320 | 2 / 4 | 3.9 GHz | 4 MB | 51 W | Intel HD Graphics 530 |
| Core i3-6300 | 2 / 4 | 3.8 GHz | 4 MB | 51 W | Intel HD Graphics 530 |
| Core i3-6100 | 2 / 4 | 3.7 GHz | 3 MB | 51 W | Intel HD Graphics 530 |
These are the specifications reported for the processors in the original review. The 100 MHz steps help explain why the i3-6320 and i3-6300 tend to be close, while the i3-6100 usually trails by a modest amount. Cache effects depend on the workload; the extra megabyte does not make the higher models universally faster by a large margin.
The “51 W” figure is TDP, not a promise that the processor or the complete PC always draws 51 watts. TDP is a thermal-design rating used to guide cooling and system design. Actual CPU package power varies with workload, and wall power also includes the motherboard, memory, storage, graphics card and power-supply losses. The chips do not have Intel Turbo Boost, so their nominal frequency is not raised by Turbo; motherboard firmware and settings can still influence system behavior. AnandTech discussed both the absence of Turbo and the challenge of differing motherboard performance settings in its test-methodology notes.
#1 Best Overall
- 4 cores (4 P-cores + 0 E-cores) and 8 threads. Integrated Intel UHD Graphics 730 included.
- Performance two core microarchitecture, prioritizing and distributing workloads to optimize performance
- Up to 4.7 GHz unlocked. 12MB Cache
- Compatible with Intel 600-series (with potential BIOS update) and 700-series chipset-based motherboards
- PCIe 5.0 & 4.0 support. DDR4 and DDR5 Memory support. RM1 thermal solution included.
What the 2016 tests show—and what they do not
This was a historical benchmark review, not a test of today’s software or graphics cards. AnandTech used a consistent test platform and standardized the operating system’s performance mode to reduce some sources of variation. The publication also noted that motherboard makers may apply different performance-enhancing settings, making cross-platform comparisons less straightforward. Its results drew on multiple benchmark categories and, in some cases, the publication’s historical Bench database.
The workloads included Cinebench R15, HandBrake, Hybrid x265, Agisoft PhotoScan, WinRAR, browser tests such as Mozilla Kraken and Google Octane, and Linux-Bench tests including NPB and Redis. The review used period software—including HandBrake 0.9.9, WinRAR 5.0.1 and Cinebench R15—and should be read in that context. See AnandTech’s productivity results and Linux results for the benchmark details.
The broad ordering was predictable: i3-6320, then i3-6300, then i3-6100. The 6320’s 100 MHz lead over the 6300 rarely made the pair far apart. The 6100 was slower, but it generally remained in the same performance neighborhood rather than falling dramatically behind. That is the central reason it made sense as the value option at the prices considered in 2016.
Recommended Free Tools
Rank #2
- 4 cores (4 P-cores + 0 E-cores) and 8 threads
- Performance two core microarchitecture, prioritizing and distributing workloads to optimize performance
- Up to 4.7 GHz unlocked. 12MB Cache
- Compatible with Intel 600-series (with potential BIOS update) and 700-series chipset-based motherboards
- PCIe 5.0 & 4.0 support. DDR4 and DDR5 Memory support. RM1 thermal solution included. Discrete graphics required.
Light work suits them better than sustained workloads
For office tasks, everyday desktop use, and lightly threaded applications, these Skylake i3s could be responsive. A task that relies on one or a few fast threads can benefit from their clock speeds and per-core performance. That also helps explain why a high-clocked i3 could compete well in some period tests against processors with more threads.
The limit appears when work can keep many cores busy. Hyper-Threading lets each physical core handle two logical threads more effectively in some situations, but it does not turn two physical cores into four. Sustained video encoding, rendering, compression, large software builds, virtual machines, and heavy multitasking can expose that distinction. AnandTech found workloads where older AMD FX processors with more threads pulled ahead in multi-threaded tests, even as Skylake performed strongly in many single-threaded ones.
A four-core Core i5 such as the i5-6600 was a more capable general-purpose option for sustained multi-threaded work. More physical cores can matter more than a small clock difference as software uses additional threads. On a used system, an i5 upgrade may be worthwhile if the price is close—but check the exact motherboard’s CPU-support list and required BIOS version. Sharing the LGA1151 socket does not guarantee every board supports every later processor.
Rank #3
- Intel® Core® i3 3.30 GHz processor uses less power and the hyper-threading architecture delivers high performance for demanding applications at an affordable price
- 12 MB of L3 cache rapidly retrieves the most used data available to improve system performance
- Built-in Intel UHD Graphics 730 controller for improved graphics and visual quality. Supports up to 4 monitors.
Linux results are workload-specific
The Linux section illustrates why a single benchmark cannot stand in for “Linux performance.” AnandTech tested a mix of scientific, cryptographic, memory and server-style workloads. Some favored Intel’s per-core performance and frequency; Redis highlighted how cache and additional physical cores can matter under heavier loading. Those results describe the particular software versions and test environment used at the time, not a current distribution-wide ranking. Kernel versions, compiler choices, security mitigations and applications have all changed since then.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Gaming: integrated graphics versus a discrete GPU
Intel HD Graphics 530
HD Graphics 530 is adequate for a desktop display, video playback, troubleshooting, and some older or undemanding games at reduced settings. It was not a strong solution for demanding games, even by the expectations of the review period. AnandTech found weak integrated-graphics performance in Total War: Attila at 720p Low, and its GRID: Autosport test showed the Intel graphics failing to maintain a 30-FPS minimum target at 1080p Medium. The results are documented in the review’s Attila testing and GRID testing.
That does not mean every game is unplayable: the outcome depends on the title, resolution and settings. HD 530 uses system memory, so memory configuration is relevant; dual-channel memory may help compared with a single-channel setup, though the size of any gain depends on the workload. Check the motherboard manual for supported memory type and configuration.
Rank #4
- Intel UHD Graphics 630
- Compatible only with Motherboards based on Intel 300 Series Chipsets
- Cores: 4, Threads: 4
- 3.60 GHz Base Frequency / 6 MB Cache
- Intel Optane Memory Supported
With a discrete graphics card
A discrete GPU shifts more of the gaming work away from the integrated graphics and makes CPU differences easier to see. In AnandTech’s tested scenarios, the three i3s formed a small performance staircase, with the 6320 leading. The review’s historical summary put the gaming gap between the 6100 and faster models at roughly 2–4 frames per second, or about 5%, in its tested configurations—not as a universal result across games or systems.
Averages do not tell the whole story. Two physical cores can constrain games with heavier background work, and frame-time consistency or low-percentile performance may suffer even when average frame rates look acceptable. Streaming, recording, busy multiplayer matches, background applications, the game engine, resolution, preset and GPU all affect the result. Do not extrapolate these 2016 tests to current games or graphics cards.
Does the i3-6100’s 3 MB cache matter?
The 6100 has 3 MB of L3 cache, compared with 4 MB on the 6300 and 6320. Cache stores data closer to the processor than system memory; when a workload can reuse cached data, avoiding slower memory access may help. The size of that benefit depends on the workload’s data and access patterns, so cache capacity alone does not predict overall performance.
Best Value
- Country Of Origin :China
- Package Dimensions :7.3Cm L X10.7Cm W X11.8Cm H
- Package Weight :9.9Ounces
- Product Type : Computer Processor
AnandTech saw the smaller cache contribute to extra separation in some cases, including Dolphin and certain Linux and gaming workloads. It was not a large, consistent handicap across the review. Clock speed, thread count and the application’s behavior also matter, and the 6100 remained a sensible buy when its lower price outweighed the modest performance loss.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.Which one should you choose?
- Core i3-6100: Best value among these three in the original review’s pricing context. It is the sensible pick if it is materially cheaper and the system is for basic use, older games, or a low-cost secondary PC.
- Core i3-6300: A conditional middle choice. Consider it if the premium over the 6100 is small, or if it comes as part of a better-condition system. Its 100 MHz advantage and larger cache do not justify a large price gap by themselves.
- Core i3-6320: Fastest of these three in the review. It makes sense if priced almost the same as the 6300, if you already own it, or if you are building a period-correct Skylake system. A large premium is hard to justify for the modest lead shown.
The historical value conclusion was based on the prices at review time: AnandTech’s contemporaneous comparison put the 6100 about $30 below the 6320 in boxed-CPU pricing, while the gaming difference was small in its tested setups. That is not a current price. The review’s conclusion and the quoted historical comparison are discussed in this contemporaneous AnandTech forum thread.
Buying one in 2026: price the whole platform
These are 2015-era, discontinued processors. Their 2016 benchmark ranking remains useful for understanding the comparison, but it cannot establish today’s used prices, condition, security posture, firmware support or performance in modern applications. No current regional price is assumed here.
Crashes, No Sound, or Screen Glitches?
Random freezes, missing sound and display glitches usually trace back to one bad driver. Find and replace yours safely.Free scan · under a minuteWindows Errors? Fix Them Before They Spread
Repair common Windows errors and clear accumulated junk for a smoother, more stable PC - no reinstall needed.Free scan · no reinstallIf you already own a compatible LGA1151 motherboard, a cheap drop-in CPU may be reasonable for light desktop use. If you need to buy a board and memory as well, compare the total cost against a complete newer used desktop or a newer platform with more physical cores. The apparently cheapest CPU can become an uneconomical choice when compatible boards or parts are scarce.
Before buying, verify:
- Motherboard and BIOS support: Use the board maker’s exact CPU-support list; socket fit alone is not enough.
- Memory type: Skylake boards may use DDR4 or, on some models, DDR3L. Do not assume ordinary desktop DDR3 is suitable; follow the board manual’s type and voltage requirements.
- Complete-system cost: Include board, memory, cooler or mounting hardware, storage, power supply, graphics card if needed, and any operating-system requirements.
- Condition and seller terms: Check whether the processor is boxed or tray, whether a cooler is included, and what return protection or warranty applies. For an old PC, inspect the motherboard, socket pins, power supply and cooling as well as the CPU.
- Workload and support needs: Avoid this platform if you need smooth modern gaming, frequent encoding or rendering, virtual machines, a long upgrade path, or modern platform features. Check current operating-system and application requirements rather than assuming results from a 2016 review settle compatibility.
A used Core i5 may be a better upgrade if it costs only a little more and the board supports it. Otherwise, compare against a complete, newer system with more cores. Which alternative is best depends on local availability and total price; the original review cannot settle that 2026 market question.
Final ranking
- Best historical value: Core i3-6100. It was usually only modestly slower in the review and cost less in the period’s pricing comparison.
- Best raw performance of the three: Core i3-6320. It leads, but offers limited reason to pay a large premium.
- Most conditional: Core i3-6300. Its place depends on being priced close to the 6100 or bundled into a particularly good system.
For a 2026 purchase, the deciding question is not which old i3 won the charts; it is whether the whole compatible system costs less than a better-used alternative and is adequate for the work you actually do.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
