CPU Comparison
Intel Core i3-10105F vs Intel Core i3-10320
A side-by-side comparison of specs, performance and value. The Intel Core i3-10105F is a budget-focused 4-core, 8-thread desktop processor that removes the integrated graphics to achieve a $97 launch price, built on 14nm Comet Lake-R silicon for dedicated gaming builds.
The Bottom Line
Overview & Launch
Specifications Compared
Performance Compared
Productivity
Handles standard office work and web browsing fine, but the lack of an iGPU means no hardware video encoding acceleration for quick sync.
Handles office suites and web apps well, but the 65W PL1 will cause throttling in long-running Excel macros or heavy multitasking.
Gaming
When paired with a mid-range GPU, it delivers smooth eSports performance and playable 1080p experience in older AAA titles, though modern heavy games will be CPU-limited.
Requires a discrete GPU for gaming. The CPU itself can handle budget GPUs without severe bottlenecking at 1080p.
Virtualization
Same 8-thread virtualization capability as the 10105, adequate for a single light VM.
4 cores and 8 threads can run a couple of light virtual machines, but it is not ideal for dedicated lab environments.
Efficiency
Efficiency is comparable to the 10105; the disabled iGPU saves a negligible amount of power under load.
The 14nm process shows its age; newer Ryzen 3 parts offer significantly better performance per watt.
Specialized Performance
AI / ML
- No iGPU means no Intel Quick Sync for video AI workloads
- CPU-bound inference is slow on 4 cores
- No AI acceleration hardware
- Lacks AVX-512 instructions
- Not suitable for AI workloads
Content Creation
Gaming
- Requires a discrete GPU to function
- Excellent frame rates in CPU-light eSports titles
- Bottlenecks modern GPUs in CPU-intensive games
- 4 cores/8 threads are the bare minimum for modern gaming
- UHD 630 iGPU cannot handle modern games
- CPU performance is adequate for entry-level dedicated GPUs
- Lacks PCIe 4.0 for future GPU upgrades
Industry Impact
Best CPU by Use Case
Target Audience
Strengths & Weaknesses
Pros
- Extremely low launch price of $97
- No compromise on CPU performance versus the 10105
- Full x16 PCIe 3.0 bandwidth for the GPU
- Low 65W power draw
- Enables viable sub-$400 gaming PC builds
Cons
- System will not boot without a discrete GPU
- No Intel Quick Sync video encoding
- Limited to PCIe 3.0
- Memory capped at DDR4-2666
- 14nm process is power-hungry compared to competitors
- Limited to 4 cores for modern gaming
Pros
- High 4.6 GHz boost clock for snappy single-thread performance
- 8 threads provide good multitasking for the price
- Low 65W sustained power draw keeps temperatures down
- Includes enterprise features like TSX and TXT
- Solid performance for basic office environments
Cons
- OEM-exclusive, difficult to buy separately
- Confusing and misleading 91W TDP labeling
- DDR4-2666 memory speed cap
- Only 16 PCIe 3.0 lanes
- Outperformed by cheaper Ryzen 3 alternatives in multi-threaded tasks
Competitors & Alternatives
Intel Core i3-10105F
- AMD Ryzen 3 3100Rival
Budget Gaming
- AMD Ryzen 3 3300XRival
Budget Gaming
- Intel Core i3-11100FRival
Next-Gen Budget Gaming
- AMD Ryzen 5 3500Rival
Mainstream Gaming
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i5-10400FRival
Mainstream Gaming
A generational leap in IPC and gaming performance if moving to the LGA 1700 platform.
Compare head-to-head- AMD Ryzen 5 5600Alt
The best value 6-core option for modern gaming, offering much better longevity.
Only if you absolutely need integrated graphics as a backup.
Compare head-to-head
Intel Core i3-10320
- AMD Ryzen 3 3100Rival
Budget Desktop
- AMD Ryzen 3 3300XRival
Budget Desktop
- AMD Athlon 3000GRival
Entry Desktop
- Intel Pentium Gold G6600Rival
Entry Desktop
- AMD Ryzen 5 1600 AFRival
Budget Desktop
Nearly identical performance but available at retail for a much lower price.
Compare head-to-headAdds 2 more cores for a significant multi-threaded boost at a reasonable price.
Compare head-to-head- AMD Ryzen 5 3600Alt
Superior multi-core performance, PCIe 4.0, and often priced competitively.
A massive generational leap in IPC and efficiency on the LGA 1700 platform.
Compare head-to-head
Our Verdict on Each
An exceptional value proposition in its time, stripping the iGPU to offer the cheapest entry point into dedicated gaming on the LGA 1200 platform, though now overshadowed by newer architectures.
Best for: Finding one used for under $30 to revive an old LGA 1200 gaming rig or complete a ultra-low-budget build with spare parts.
Read the full reviewA capable 4-core processor for basic computing, but its OEM exclusivity and confusing 91W/65W power spec make it irrelevant for custom builders.
Best for: The Intel Core i3-10320 is not a processor you should actively seek out to build a new PC, primarily because it was never intended for the retail market. If you are upgrading an existing OEM desktop that currently houses this chip, it is generally not worth the investment to swap it out for an i5 or i7 due to motherboard BIOS restrictions common in pre-built systems. However, if you are purchasing a used office PC on the cheap that contains the i3-10320, it remains surprisingly capable for everyday tasks. Its 4 cores and 8 threads, combined with a 4.6 GHz boost clock, handle web browsing, office applications, and 1080p media consumption without breaking a sweat. Just be aware of the 65W PL1 limit, which may throttle sustained workloads, and the DDR4-2666 memory speed cap, which slightly bottlenecks the integrated UHD 630 graphics. Avoid it for any serious gaming or content creation.
Read the full reviewFrequently Asked Questions
Which is better, Intel Core i3-10105F or Intel Core i3-10320?
Based on our editorial ratings, the Intel Core i3-10105F comes out ahead with a score of 6.5/10. That said, the best choice depends on your workload — check the spec and performance breakdown above for gaming, productivity and efficiency differences.
Which is faster for gaming, Intel Core i3-10105F or Intel Core i3-10320?
For gaming, the Intel Core i3-10320 leads with a gaming performance score of 28/100 among Intel Core i3-10105F and Intel Core i3-10320.
Which uses less power?
The Intel Core i3-10105F has the lowest rated TDP. Power draw across these chips: Intel Core i3-10105F (65 W), Intel Core i3-10320 (91 W).
Do Intel Core i3-10105F and Intel Core i3-10320 use the same socket?
Yes — all of these CPUs use the LGA 1200 socket, so they share compatible motherboards.
Which is faster in multi-core benchmarks?
The Intel Core i3-10320 posts the highest multi-core benchmark score. Multi-core results: Intel Core i3-10320 (0). Benchmark figures are approximate and workload-dependent.