Amd a series vs intel i3: Intel vs AMD: processors highlighted — Coolblue

What is AMD Equivalent to Intel Core i3?

Basically, the closest AMD equivalent to the Intel Core i3 processor is the Ryzen 3 line of CPUs. Much like the Core i3s, Ryzen 3 CPUs are meant for budget gamers, beginner content creators and generally for systems that aren’t built for very high computing demands.

The Intel Core i3 is a basic CPU line from Intel. This CPU line is intended to provide the minimal necessary performance required to run games and heavier professional software.

Hence, Intel Core i3s are often found in budget desktops and laptops due to their lower power consumption and heat generation.

The same idea is also true for the AMD Ryzen 3 CPUs. As such, in this article, I will talk in detail about what is AMD equivalent to Intel Core i3.

While both AMD Ryzen 3 and Intel Core 3 are comparable, for a fair comparison of price and performance, you have to take into consideration the type and generation of Core i3 and the Ryzen 3 processors. There are different models of Ryzen 3 and Core i3 even within a certain generation.

Nevertheless, despite hailing from the budget range, both AMD Ryzen 3 and Intel Core i3 processors are not the weakest CPUs around. That title, is in fact, held by the cheaper Intel Celeron, Pentium and AMD Ahtlon CPUs.

Here we look at both the Intel Core i3 and the AMD Ryzen 3 processors in detail and see how they compare to each other across models and generation.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

So What is AMD Equivalent to Intel Core i3?

We have already established that when it comes to performance and price range, AMD’s Ryzen 3 lineup is the closest equivalent to the Core i3s from Intel.

In the following we text we analyze why.

Brief Details on AMD Ryzen 3 CPU

Types

There are several models of CPUs belonging to Ryzen 3 family, each with different specs and features.

In order to make a fair comparison with the Intel Core i3 CPUs, you will have to note the type of AMD Ryzen 3 processor in question.

Essentially there are three types of AMD Ryzen 3 processors that you can find:

1. Mobile/Laptop Based

Mobile based AMD Ryzen 3 processors usually have the “U” designation such as the AMD Ryzen 3250U or the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5450U.

The U designation relates to the fact that these processors have a low TDP, low cooling requirement and as a result a higher battery life.

Due to their lower TDP, the mobile based CPUs are far weaker in performance as compared to their desktop-based counterparts. This is true for both AMD Ryzen 3 and Intel Core i3 CPUs.

2. Desktop-Based Ryzen 3 CPUs Without iGPU

These generally have the best CPU performance but they lack an integrated graphics card and hence cannot power the built-in video ports on the motherboards.

Examples include the Ryzen 3 3100 and the Ryzen 3 3100X. Currently, there are no Ryzen 3 processors from the 4000 and 5000 series in this category.

3. Desktop-Based Ryzen 3 CPUs With iGPU

These are specialized CPUs by AMD that come with an integrated VEGA graphics card. These are often called APUs or Accelerated Processing Units.

These CPUs are great if you do not wish to spend on a dedicated graphics card. The integrated graphics here would allow you to use the built-in video ports of the motherboard.

Examples include the Ryzen 3 3200G, Ryzen 3 4300G and Ryzen 3 5300G.

Also Read: Difference Between Pentium and Core i3 Processors

Comparison with Intel Core i3 Line Ups

Intel Core i3 family also has mobile and desktop based processors. However, unlike AMD which only offers an integrated GPU on its “G” series CPUs, with Intel almost all of the CPUs come with an integrated graphics card.

Only the Intel processors with an ‘F’ suffix LACK an integrated graphics, such as the Intel Core i3 10100F.

Another difference with Intel processors is that only the “unlocked” processors, with a “K” suffix such as the Intel Core i3-9350K are overclockable. In contrast, all of the AMD CPUs, including Ryzen 3, are unlocked and are overclockable.

Comparing Intel Core i3 and AMD Ryzen 3 Processors

The best way to compare the two processor lines is using the benchmark results from famous Benchmarking metrics like Passmark Or Cinebench R15.

When comparing the processor, you have to look at both the single core as well as the multi core performance.

This is because for some use cases single-core performance matters more and for others multi-core performance.

For instance, CAD designing, FPS /RPG gaming etc benefits more from a good single core performance of the CPU.

On the other hand, rendering, transcoding, streaming, simulation and strategy games benefit more from a higher multi-core performance of the CPU.

Note on the Generation Parity

We had mentioned this earlier, but to reiterate this point, when comparing Intel Core i3 and AMD Ryzen 3 processors, you have to make sure that you choose a similar or at least a REASONABLY similar generation from both for a fair comparison.

There has to be a parity when comparing. For instance it would be unwise and unfair to choose a third generation Intel Core i3-3110M processor released in 2012 and compare it with 3rd Generation AMD Ryzen 3 3300X series released in 2020.

The two processors are 8 years apart and in CPU terms 8 years is an aeon.

CPU	Specs	Type	Passmark/ Cinbench R15 Single/ R15 Multi
Intel Core i3 10110U	2 Cores 4 Threads 2.1-4.1 GHz	Laptop	4093/ 171/ 405
AMD Ryzen 3 3250U	2 Cores 4 Threads 2.6-3.5 GHz	Laptop	4170/ 138/ 344
Intel Core i3 1215U	6 Cores – 2 Performance – 4 Efficient 8 Threads 4. 4 GHz	Laptop	12874
AMD Ryzen 3 3200G	4 Cores 4 Threads 3.6-4.0 GHz	Desktop With iGPU	7237/ 154/ 605
Intel Core i3 10320	4 Cores 8 Threads 3.8-4.6 GHz	Desktop	10247/ 206/ 1080
AMD Ryzen 3 3300X	4 Cores 8 Threads 3.8-4.3 GHz	Desktop Without iGPU	12751/ 200/ 1129
Intel Core i3 12300	4 Cores 8 Threads 3.5-4.4 GHz	Desktop	14955

The table above compares some top of the line Intel Core i3 and AMD Ryzen 3 processor from 10th Gen and 3000 series respectively.

These two generations have been chosen because they both have a parity in release dates, specs and price tags.

As you can see, in both mainstream laptop and desktop based series, both the Ryzen 3 and Intel Core i3 processor have almost similar results as well as specs.

The Intel Core i3-10110U does take a lead in the mobile/laptop segment variants (considering the Cinebench scores), but in the desktop segment, the AMD Ryzen 3 3300X takes the lead.

However, note that the AMD Ryzen 3 3300X does not feature an integrated graphics, whereas the Intel Core i3-10320 does.

The Intel Core i3-10320 can thus save you from investing in a dedicated graphics card for video output.

The iGPU based AMD Ryzen 3 3200G, however, is quite weak both in specs as well as in benchmark results, but it offers a superior Vega 8 graphics card which can give you fairly decent results on popular online games such as CS:GO, Fortnite on lower graphical settings.

Also Read:

Is Intel Celeron Good for School Work?
How to Check How Many CPU Threads Do I Have?

Intel 12th Generation Core i3 Processors

With the advent of the latest 12th Generation, Intel has finally brought an end to hiatus to the low-level CPUs.

Both Intel and AMD had skipped a generation for the Core i3 and Ryzen 3 lines of CPUs for the 11th Gen and 5000 series respectively.

With the 12th Generation we have already seen huge improvement with both desktop and laptop computing.

Intel Core i3 1215U, is particularly of interest here as it is profoundly more powerful than any other Core i3 or Ryzen 3 out there.

In addition to that, with this generation Intel brings the Hybrid core technology whereby the CPUs have both performance and efficient cores.

However, to make a comparison for the 12th Gen CPUs, we will have to wait for the next Zen 4 AM5 based AMD CPUs.

Intel Core i3 vs Ryzen 3 Benchmarks

Passmark

Scores taken from CPUbenchmark.net

Cinebench R15 (Single Core)

Scores taken from CPUMonkey.com

Surprisingly, the Intel Core i3 10320 has an excellent single core performance compared to even the popular AMD Ryzen 3 3300X.

Cinebench R15 (Multi Core)

Scores taken from CPUMonkey.com

As expected, CPUs with more cores = better multi-core performance. The Ryzen 3s do have an edge on their Core i3 counterparts in multi-core performance.

Similarities Between Core i3 and Ryzen 3

Both chips are lower-end models in their respective lines. They are good options for users building a semi-performance based PC on a tight budget and require the necessary performance for basic gaming and content creation.

They are both more than just capable of day-to-day computing needs. For day-to-day computing, AMD has the Athlon series and Intel has Celeron and Pentium series.

For both AMD and Intel, CPU models range anywhere from featuring 2 cores for mobile based chips to 4 cores for desktop based chips.

Support for multithreading is however dependent on the specific chip model since some Core i3s and Ryzen 3s have support for this and others don’t. So, they’re more or less the same in this regard.

Among the new generations, the performance between some of the models in either line is almost at par, with small differences as seen in Cinebench R15 benchmarks, case in point is the Ryzen 3 3300X’s single core of 200 versus the i3-10320’s 206 points and multi-core score of 1129 vs 1080 for the two respective processors.

Also Read: How Many Cores Does an i3 Have?

Performance/Dollar Value

Both Intel Core i3 and Ryzen 3 processors are also priced relatively the same. However the Ryzen does seem to have a better performance/dollar value at least when comparing Ryzen 3000 series vs 10th Gen Core processors.

Take for instance the Ryzen 3 3300X. This has an MSRP of $120. The Intel Core i3 10320 has an MSRP of $162!

AMD Ryzen does seem to falter in performance/dollar value when you compare the newer Ryzen 5000 series vs 11th Gen Intel Core. Look up benchmarks and MSRP for AMD Ryzen 5 5600X vs Intel Core i5 11600K for instance.

When taking the performance dollar for the new 12th Gen CPUs such as the Intel Core i3 12300 with an MSRP of $143 and Passmark score of 14955, the value for money is off the roof for now.

We will see how this fares against the newer AMD CPUs.

Also Read:

How Many PCIe Lanes Does Ryzen Have?

Final Words

The Ryzen 3 is the closest equivalent to Intel’s Core i3 series in terms of performance, although with different models and generations available, there are variations in specs and performance.

Essentially, both Ryzen 3 and Core i3 lines have sub $150 chips that perform well on entry-level systems and some even offer decent gaming performance for budget gaming rigs.

Also Read:

Build Guide for Minecraft Gaming PC
Build Guide for Budget Video Editing PC
Build Guide for Roblox Gaming PC

AMD Ryzen 5 4100 vs Intel Core i3-12100F: Which $99 CPU?

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware, Shutterstock)

If you’re on a tight budget building your PC, you can find a workable processor for under $100. Both AMD and Intel have options that fall into this price band in the form of the Intel Core i3-12100F and the AMD Ryzen 3 4100. But which is the best $99 CPU?

Intel’s Alder Lake Core i3-12100F is the GPU-less variant of the Core i3-12100 that sits atop our list of best cheap CPUs and dominates other low-cost chips in our CPU benchmark hierarchy. If you don’t have a graphics card and need an integrated GPU, you can grab the 12100 for $122, but aside from the loss of QuickSync video encoding (due to the integrated GPU), these chips are interchangeable.

Unfortunately, AMD was late to counter because it abandoned the budget market during the pandemic, but the $99 Ryzen 3 4100 and $125 Ryzen 5 4500 are designed to challenge the Core i3-12100/F.

The 7nm quad-core Ryzen 3 4100 is part of AMD’s new strategy of using its monolithic (single-chip) ‘Renoir’ APU silicon to tackle the sub-$150 market that it had effectively ceded to Alder Lake. However, AMD decided to use the Zen 2 architecture for the Ryzen 3 4100 even though its most modern chips come with the Zen 3 architecture, and even those are soon to be dated — AMD launches its Zen 4 designs this fall. That isn’t the best situation for AMD because the dated Zen 2 architecture imposes performance and connectivity tradeoffs — for instance, the chip has the PCIe 3.0 interface so it can’t take advantage of the best SSDs for performance, all of which use PCIe 4.0.

Meanwhile, Intel’s Core i3-12100/F comes with the company’s ‘Intel 7′ process node and its most modern Golden Cove architecture that powers the chips’ four P-cores. Additionally, the Core i3-12100/F supports the latest interfaces, like DDR5 and PCIe 5.0, and offers broader connectivity options, but you’ll need a new motherboard. In contrast, the Ryzen 3 4100 drops right into existing AM4 motherboards to provide an upgrade path for Ryzen owners.

Below we’ve put the Ryzen 3 4100 and Core i3-12100F through a six-round faceoff to see which chip takes the crown in our gaming and application benchmarks, along with other key criteria like power consumption and pricing. Let’s see which is the best CPU under $100.

Today’s best AMD Ryzen 3 4100, Intel Core i3-12100F and deals

$105. 99

View

$106.99

View

Reduced Price

$216.60

$144.40

View

Show More Deals

Features and Specifications: Ryzen 3 4100 vs Core i3-12100F

	Price — Street/MSRP	Design — Arch.	Cores / Threads	Base/Boost (GHz)	TDP / PBP / MTP	Memory Support	L3 Cache
Core i3-12100 / F	$122 — $99 (F)	Alder Lake	4 / 8 (4P+0E)	3.3 / 4.3	60W / 89W	DDR4/5-3200/4800	12MB
Ryzen 3 4100	$99	Zen 2 — Renoir	4 / 8	3. 8 / 4.0	65W	DDR4-3200	4MB

The quad-core eight-thread Core i3-12100 comes with integrated graphics for $122, but, if you have a graphics card, you can opt for the graphics-less Core i3-12100F model for $99. Otherwise, both Core i3 chips have the same specs and performance, though you lose QuickSync capabilities with the F-series model.

The 12100F comes with a 60W/58W PBP (base) and 89W MTP (peak) power rating. The chip clocks in with a 3.3 GHz base, boosts up to 4.3 GHz and has 12 MB of L3 cache. The Core i3-12100F supports DDR4-3200 or up to DDR5-4800 memory, but caveats apply. PCIe support varies by motherboard, but the chip exposes up to 16 lanes of PCIe 5.0 and an additional four lanes of PCIe 4.0 from the chip for M.2 storage.

The Core i3-12100F has a locked multiplier, so the CPU cores aren’t overclockable. However, Intel does support memory overclocking on Z690, H670, and B660 motherboards (Z690 doesn’t make sense for this class of chip, though), and the chip comes with a bundled Laminar RM1 cooler. The standard 12100 model comes with the UHD Graphics 730 engine with 24 EUs that operate at 300/1400 MHz.

As with other 65W Ryzen 5000 chips, the quad-core eight-thread Ryzen 3 4100 comes with a Wraith Spire cooler. The $99 chip operates at 3.8 / 4.0 GHz base/boost clocks and comes with 4MB of L3 cache. It has a disabled Vega graphics engine, and there is no option for a graphics-equipped AMD equivalent in this price range.

The Ryzen 3 4100 supports 20 lanes of PCIe 3.0 instead of PCIe 4.0, which is a significant downside if you want to use a PCIe 4.0 SSD fully. Due to the slower interface, this chip would be best with older, lower-end AM4 motherboards (you don’t want to pay for PCIe 4.0 functionality you don’t need). The 4100 is compatible with the broad ecosystem of coolers for the AM4 socket and drops into 300-, 400- and 500-series motherboards (Socket AM4). The Ryzen 3 4100 is fully unlocked for overclocking the CPU cores, memory, and fabric.

Winner: Intel

The Ryzen 3 4100 has the aging Zen 2 architecture that debuted in 2019, so it only supports the PCIe 3. 0 interface and has a comparatively paltry 4MB of L3 cache. The chip also doesn’t have integrated graphics, a wash with the Core i3-12100F at the $99 price point. Notably, there isn’t an equivalent ~$120 model with an iGPU as we see with the Core i3-12100.

Intel’s Alder Lake has a clear connectivity advantage: With DDR5 and PCIe 5.0 on the menu, AMD’s aging AM4 platform is outclassed. Of course, the support for DDR5 memory doesn’t factor in much with a chip at this price point, but the faster PCIe interface (4.0 for the M.2 SSD slot) is a pronounced advantage over the Ryzen 3 4100. These days, you can get a PCIe 4.0 SSD like the Crucial P3 Plus for less than $100.

The Ryzen 3 4100 does support full overclocking (see how to overclock your CPU), whereas the 12100F is restricted to memory overclocking only. However, as you’ll see in the benchmarks below, that doesn’t matter much.

Gaming Benchmarks and Performance: Ryzen 3 4100 vs Core i3-12100F

We have more in-depth testing in our Ryzen 3 4100 review. Head there for more details about the test setup.

Below you can see the geometric mean of our gaming tests with the Ryzen 3 4100 vs the Core i3-12100 / 12100F at 1080p and 1440p, with each resolution split into its own chart. As usual, we’re testing with an Nvidia GeForce RTX 3090 to reduce GPU-imposed bottlenecks as much as possible. Differences between test subjects will shrink with lesser cards or higher resolutions. Of course, you would never see these low-end chips paired with an RTX 3090, but this allows us to highlight unrestrained chip performance.

Image 1 of 19

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware )

The first few charts above comprise the geometric mean of our standard gaming test suite, but we also include the individual game benchmarks in the album.

The quad-core Zen 2-powered Ryzen 3 4100 is easily the slowest chip in the lineup. That isn’t too surprising given its older architecture, tame 4.0 GHz boost clock, and scant 4MB of L3 cache. In contrast, the Core i3-12100 / 12100F’s Golden Cove P-cores give even the Zen 3-powered Ryzen 5000G chips a stiff challenge, so it isn’t surprising that the Zen 2 Renoir chip lags the competition.

The Ryzen 3 4100 simply can’t compete with the Core i3-12100F in gaming. For similar or slightly lower pricing, the Core i3-12100F is a whopping 49% faster than the Ryzen 3 4100. There’s no doubt — budget gamers should opt for Intel’s chip over the Ryzen competition.

Intel still limits Core i3 overclocking to the memory, reducing gains to a few percentage points. In contrast, AMD allows full overclocking of both Ryzen 4000 models, but it isn’t too useful for either chip. The overclocked Ryzen 3 4100 is a mere 3% faster than the stock config,

Winner: Intel

In our review, we dubbed the Core i3-12100 ‘the little gaming giant,’ and this series of tests prove it. The Core i3-12100F scores an overwhelming win as it completely outclasses the Ryzen 3 4100.

The Core 3-12100F also punches up against much more well-equipped Zen 3 processors and is equally impressive compared to Intel’s higher-end Alder Lake models, delivering 88% of the 12400’s gaming performance but for 56% less cash.

Application Performance: Ryzen 3 4100 vs Core i3-12100F

Image 1 of 7

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

We can boil down productivity application performance into two broad categories: single- and multi-threaded. The first slide above shows the geometric mean of performance in several of our most important tests in each category, but be sure to look at the individual benchmark results in the album.

The Core i3-12100 / 12100F is 44% faster than the Ryzen 3 4100 in our cumulative measure of single-threaded performance, showing that its performance in single-threaded work, which is often latency-sensitive, simply isn’t up to par with more modern offerings. This poor showing helps explain the Ryzen 3 4100’s lackluster gaming performance.

We do have to bear in mind that the Core i3-12100F is particularly impressive in single-threaded work, though – the $550 Ryzen 9 5950X is the only Ryzen chip that can match the Core i3-12100F’s single-threaded performance in our CPU benchmarks hierarchy. You’ll have to look to other Alder Lake chips to find faster performance in single-threaded work.

Image 1 of 15

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

The Ryzen 3 4100 doesn’t fare much better in the threaded benchmarks. The quad-core 12100 is 40% faster than the quad-core Ryzen 3 4100, leaving the Core i3-12100F as the uncontested winner in all three facets of performance – gaming, single- and multi-threaded work.

Winner: Intel

The Ryzen 3 4100 vs Core i3-12100F competition isn’t even close in our productivity benchmarks. The Golden Cove-equipped Alder Lake Core i3 is simply too powerful for the outdated Zen 2 architecture, giving the Core i3-12100F the lead in every performance metric.

Overclocking: Ryzen 3 4100 vs Core i3-12100F

Intel has long locked overclocking to its pricey K-series models, while AMD has freely allows overclocking with almost all SKUs on almost any platform (A-series excluded). However, we see some improvement here from Intel — it has now enabled memory overclocking on its B- and H-series chipsets.

Memory overclocking actually pays off with the higher-end locked Intel models, but it doesn’t amount to much extra performance with the Core i3-12100F. As we saw in our benchmarks, overclocking the memory only gained a few percentage points and likely isn’t worth the effort or cost. You can circumvent Intel’s overclocking restrictions by selecting certain motherboards that unlock the core frequencies via an unsanctioned backdoor technique. Still, those boards are more expensive and don’t make much sense for a chip in this price class.

AMD is more generous with the Ryzen 3 4100’s overclockability, so you can manipulate core clocks and the memory and fabric frequencies. However, here we again saw little benefit – we gained ~3% in gaming and nearly nothing in most application benchmarks.

Winner: AMD

AMD gets the nod for its fully unrestricted overclocking. However, overclocking on lower-end chips is of little use with either the Ryzen 3 4100 or the Core i3-12100F. Of course, you could pair the latter with a more expensive motherboard that circumvents Intel’s locked core frequencies, but that doesn’t make much sense for this class of chip.

Power Consumption, Efficiency, and Cooling: Ryzen 3 4100 vs Core i3-12100F

Image 1 of 4

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

The Ryzen 3 4100 consumes less power than the Core i3-12100 / 12100F but also delivers far less performance in every type of workload. Meanwhile, the Alder Lake chips have improved Intel’s power efficiency metrics, but the high power limits result in higher peak power consumption and less efficiency.

The quad-core Ryzen 3 4100 draws a stunningly-low amount of power during the heavy HandBrake and y-cruncher power measurements, which delivers the superior overall efficiency we can see in the renders-per-day-per-watt metrics.

The last slide in the above album tells us quite a bit about power efficiency. In this chart, we calculate the cumulative amount of energy required to perform the workload. Then, we plot this ‘task energy’ value in Kilojoules on the left side of the chart. This workload is comprised of a fixed amount of work, so we can plot the task energy against the time required to finish the job (bottom axis), thus generating a really useful power chart.

Bear in mind that faster compute times, and lower task energy requirements, are ideal. That means processors that fall the closest to the bottom left corner of those charts are best. The Core i3-12100F is much faster, but it also draws more power.

Winner: AMD

The Ryzen 3 4100 consumes less energy and delivers more performance per watt than the Core i3-12100F, taking the win in this category. It’s too bad that superior efficiency comes with markedly lower performance. It’s noteworthy that while the Core i3-12100F isn’t quite as efficient, its power consumption is reasonable, given its performance.

Pricing: Ryzen 3 4100 vs Core i3-12100F

The Core i3-12100F and the Ryzen 3 4100 both have a $99 MSRP, and you can regularly find them near the suggested pricing. In addition, both chips have a capable bundled cooler that is more than adequate to assure stock operation, leaving platform pricing and performance-per-dollar as the primary differentiator between the two options.

The Core i3-12100F is limited to 600-series motherboards, and naturally, the B- or H-series is a good fit. The Ryzen 3 4100 is compatible all the way back to the first generation 300-series motherboards. In fact, first-, second-, and third-gen Ryzen upgraders can simply drop the chip into their existing motherboard after the requisite BIOS upgrade.

A decent entry-level B660 motherboard for the 12100F is basically the same price as an entry-level B550 for the Ryzen 3 4100, but a B550 isn’t the best option due to the unneeded support for PCIe 4.0. You can save roughly $10 by selecting a B450 motherboard, but remember that you’ll need to ensure the BIOS supports the 4100.

Stepping back to a B350 could save you some coin, but at that point, you’re typically looking for a used motherboard, and we don’t generally recommend taking that approach. Also, using A-series or H-series boards is an option, but pricing will vary widely across generations.

Winner: Intel

The Core i3-12100F drops into a more modern platform that doesn’t carry egregious premiums given the feature set, taking the win.

Regardless of the platform, the Ryzen 3 4100 simply can’t compete with the Core i3-12100F in the performance-per-dollar category – the performance delta is just too large. Some might recommend the Ryzen 3 4100 to upgrade an existing system, but we think upgraders would be better off hunting down a used Ryzen 5 3600 (or other prior-gen Ryzen) instead.

Intel Core i3-12100F vs AMD Ryzen 3 4100
	Ryzen 3 4100	Core i3-12100 / 12100F
Features and Specifications		X
Gaming		X
Application Performance		X
Overclocking	X
Power Consumption, Efficiency and Cooling	X
Pricing		X
Total	2	4

As you can see above, the Intel Core i3-12100F vs Ryzen 3 4100 rivalry ends up being a lopsided affair with a four-to-two win in Intel’s favor. Also, you could argue that the lackluster overclocking results for both chips really shouldn’t factor into the competition, which would further make it even clearer that the Intel Core i3-12100F is the best CPU under $100.

These two chips really are polar opposites. AMD largely abandoned the value segment as it dealt with unprecedented demand and a pandemic that roiled supply chains, fueling shortages. AMD planned these Zen 2 chips during a time when we needed every single piece of silicon as budget chips disappeared from shelves…for a few years. That situation changed rapidly as economic turmoil brought the shortage to a screeching halt, and Intel’s ultra-competitive Core i3s began shipping in droves. That leaves AMD with a lackluster product after demand has evaporated.

There are now plenty of chips and AMD has a new and wholly uncompetitive lineup of Zen 2-based Renoir processors to address the low end of the market. This is even though it has more modern Cezanne-based APUs that could conceivably be cut down to serve the same segment.

The Ryzen 3 4100 has no redeeming qualities that merit a recommendation, even if you’re upgrading an existing system. The Core i3-12100F outclasses the 4100 in every performance metric — it’s 49% faster in gaming, 44% faster in single-threaded applications, and 40% faster in multi-threaded work. Those are surprising differences considering these are both quad-core eight-thread chips, highlighting just how dated the Zen 2 architecture has become. The design even confers a PCIe 3.0 connectivity limitation that’s glaring compared to the Core i3-12100F’s support for both PCIe 4.0 and 5.0.

With the same pricing and the massive differences in performance, it’s hard to consider the Ryzen 3 4100 a serious contender for budget builders. In fact, most upgraders would probably fare better with a used or heavily discounted prior-gen chip, like the Ryzen 5 3600. As a result, the Zen 2-powered Ryzen 3 4100 feels like a footnote from an era where builders would settle for literally any budget chip they could find at retail.

In contrast, the Core i3-12100F is one of the best budget chips we’ve seen in years, and supply has been steady. The 12100F’s price-to-performance ratio is incredible, and the chip has a modern architecture and features that will stand the test of time. In contrast, the Ryzen 3 4100 was already outdated before it was even launched, so any system built around the chip won’t have any longevity.

The Core i3-12100 / 12100F remains the hands-down winner for budget gaming builds. Most budget builders are looking for the best all-rounder chip they can buy, and here the Core i3-12100 / 12100F unquestionably offers the best blend of performance in gaming, single- and multi-threaded work, along with a modern platform.

Core i9-12900K and Core i5-12600K Test System Configurations
Intel Socket 1700 DDR4 (Z690)	Core i3-12100, Core i5-12400
	MSI Z690A WiFi DDR4
	2x 8GB Trident Z Royal DDR4-3600 — Stock: DDR4-3200 14-14-14-36 / OC: DDR4-3800
AMD Socket AM4 (X570)	Ryzen 5 4150, 5600, 5500, 4600G, 4500, 3600, Ryzen 3 4100, 3300X
	MSI MEG X570 Godlike
	2x 8GB Trident Z Royal DDR4-3600 — Stock: DDR4-3200 14-14-14-36 \| OC/PBO: DDR4-3800 (5600X, 5600), DDR-4000 (5500), DDR4-4400 (5600G),Second-gen DDR4-3600
All Systems	Gigabyte GeForce RTX 3090 Eagle — Gaming and ProViz applications
	Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Ti FE — Application tests
	2TB Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus
	Silverstone ST1100-TI
	Open Benchtable
	Arctic MX-4 TIM
	Windows 11 Pro
Cooling	Corsair h215i, Custom loop
Overclocking note	All configurations with overclocked memory also have tuned core frequencies and/or lifted power limits.

More CPU Face-Offs

Ryzen 7 5800X3D vs Core i7-12700K and Core i9-12900K Face-Off: The Rise of 3D V-Cache
Intel Core i9-12900K vs Ryzen 9 5900X and 5950X: Alder Lake and Ryzen 5000 Face Off
Intel Core i5-12600K vs AMD Ryzen 5 5600X and 5800X Face Off: Ryzen Has Fallen
Intel Core i7-12700K vs AMD Ryzen 9 5900X and 5800X Face Off: Intel Rising
Intel Core i5-12400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 5600X Face-Off: The Gaming Value Showdown

MORE: AMD vs Intel
MORE: Zen 4 Ryzen 7000 All We Know
MORE: Raptor Lake All We Know

Paul Alcorn is the Deputy Managing Editor for Tom’s Hardware US. He writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage and enterprise hardware.

Topics

CPUs

AMD Ryzen 3 Vs Intel Core i3: The Best Budget CPU?

AMD Ryzen 3 Vs Intel Core i3: The Best Budget CPU? | Cashify Laptops Blog

Select City

Sell Phone

Sell Gadgets

Find New Gadget

Recycle

Cashify Store

Picking the best budget CPU is a tedious task, as it should deliver excellent performance and can handle day-to-day tasks with ease. Here is comprehensive comparison between AMD Ryzen 3 and Intel Core i3.

…Read More…Read Less

By Akhil Taneja |

Updated: 26th Apr 2022 12:51 IST

Buying Guide

Laptop

Write a Comment!

Highlights of the Story

AMD Ryzen 3 and Intel Core i3 are the two entry-level CPUs available in the market right now.
Picking up the right CPU that delivers the optimal performance at a budget price is the goal here.
Here is a detailed comparison between AMD Ryzen 3 and Intel Core i3

Buying a CPU for your budget PC/Laptop is a difficult job to do. With the overall cost of all hardware components skyrocketing; the overall cost to build a PC or a laptop has increased significantly. AMD Ryzen 3 and Intel Core i3 and the two CPU options that provide an overall balance of price and performance.

While both the CPUs are priced under Rs. 15,000 there are some significant differences between the two. And here in this article let’s compare AMD Ryzen 3 vs Intel Core i3 and see which one is the better pick.

Also read: Intel Processor: A Complete Buying Guide For 2022

AMD Ryzen 3 vs Intel Core i3

Intel i3 processor is one of the most popular processors released over the last decade. It has become the standard choice for most budget laptops or PC. But how do the Intel Core i3 processors compare with other popular processors like the AMD Ryzen 3? Now, let’s compare the on-paper specifications and see which one is better.

AMD Ryzen 3 vs Intel Core i3: Specifications

	Ryzen 3 3300X	Core i3-12100F
Physical cores	4 (Quad-Core)	4 (Quad-Core)
Threads	8	8
Base clock speed	3.8 GHz	3.3 GHz
Boost clock speed	4. 3 GHz	4.3 GHz
L1 cache	96K (per core)	80K (per core)
L2 cache	512K (per core)	1.25 MB (per core)
L3 cache	16 MB (shared)	12 MB (shared)
Chip lithography	7 nm	Intel 7 nm
Die size	74 mm2	163 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)	95 °C	no data
Number of transistors	3,800 million	no data
64-bit support	+	–

AMD Ryzen 3 vs Intel Core i3: Architecture

AMD Ryzen 3 is built on the Zen Microarchitecture which promises improved performance and more power efficiency. This is the architecture that brings Simultaneous Multi-Threading to AMD’s CPU line-up. For instance, the latest AMD Ryzen 3 3300X is built on Zen 2 architecture. This consists of up to two Core Complex Die (CCD), each housing eight 7nm cores, that are tied to a 12nm central I/O Die (IOD) via the Infinity Fabric.

On the other hand, the latest 12th gen Intel Core i3 (12100/F) is built with Alder Lake architecture with the Intel 7 process. This is built on 10nm Enhanced SuperFin technology and this is the 2nd gen of Intel’s 10nm process. The new alder lake architecture brings a hybrid x86 design. The Intel Core i3 12100F has four Golden Cove P-Cores active and focuses more on traditional design than having hybrid architecture.

Moreover, before we compare the actual performance of these two processors there are some fundamental differences between them. First of all the Intel Alder Lake processors for Core i3 comes with integrated graphics processing circuitry. This is what allows the Intel Core i3 processors to have the ability to run an output display without having a dedicated graphics card. A secondary Maximum Turbo Power (MTP) parameter was also introduced to show the peak power level during boost activity.

On the other hand, the AMD Ryzen 3 processors simply do not have such kind of graphics processing integrated on-chip and therefore they lack such capabilities. So if you have in mind to use another display on your system you will need to factor in the capabilities of both before you make your purchase decision. This is also the reason why the final cost of building your system using the AMD processors can significantly increase. This is because you would need some kind of dedicated GPU to be able to run an external display. So let’s take a look at the performance of the Ryzen 3 processors compared to the Intel counterparts.

Also Read: DDR5 RAM Explained? Should You Upgrade?

AMD Ryzen 3 vs Intel Core i3: Performance

Benchmark Report	Intel Core-i3 12100f	AMD Ryzen 3 3300X
Cinebench R23 (Single-Core)	1660	1295
Cinebench R23 (Multi-Core)	8049	6730
Passmark CPU (Single-Core)	3543	2670
Passmark CPU (Multi-Core)	14602	12672
Geekbench 5 (Single-Core)	1633	1298
Geekbench 5 (Multi-Core)	6325	5386

As evident from the benchmark report above the Intel Core i3 processors are the clear winner in terms of performance. This is because they have more cores and most of the Ryzen 3 processors coming out today include only entry-level specs. So in general you will get better performance to power ratio if you are going to opt for Intel.

Overall the Intel Core i3-12100 provided a much better 28.8% higher performance than the single-core score of AMD Ryzen 3 in Cinebench R23. Even in multi-core scores, the scales tipped in favour of Intel with 26% better performance than the Ryzen 3 3300X.

Where AMD Ryzen 3 shines is the multithreaded performance that it provides using all of its four threads. It has provided some benchmark scores that can go either toward core i5 or Core i3 depending on the type of optimizations. Primarily we can say that AMD has vastly improved its single-threaded performance since they launched FX-8350. As it has a strong single-threaded performance it also provides a stronger multithreaded performance which stands quite well against the Intel Core i3.

Also Read: AMD Ryzen 5 vs Intel Core i5: The Mid-Range CPU Faceoff

AMD Ryzen 3 vs Intel Core i3: Gaming

Many of the gaming benchmarks in terms gaming indicate that Ryzen 3 loses against the Intel Core i5 but performs significantly better against the Core i3. We compared both the processors in several modern games at 1080p resolutions.

Processor	Cyberpunk 2077 (1080, Ultra)	Cyberpunk 2077 (1080, Ultra + DLSS)	Cyberpunk 2077 (1080, Ultra+ RT + DLSS)	Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (4K, High)
Core i3-12100	80	145	110	256
Ryzen 3 3300X	80	126	93	236

The AMD Ryzen 3 3300X processor managed to hold in most of the intensive games at 60fps. On the other hand in some of the games where having more cores is advantageous the AMD Ryzen 3 was only 10% ahead of the Intel i3. This is not much of a difference between these two. This is what we found from our comparison with other CPUs that have higher IPC. In those cases, the Intel CPUs were able to beat the AMD Ryzen 3 lineup with up to 30% better performance.

We also compared the temperature change between both the processors while gaming. It was interesting to see the difference between both quad-core and dual cores processors. It seems logical that as AMD Ryzen 3 has more cores in its CPUs it will obviously have higher temperatures, but that is not the case. Despite having only two cores the temperature for Intel Core i3 was significantly higher. This is the result of poor thermal management and the poor materials used by Intel. This is a problem that has been noticed more in the newer Intel CPUs.

Moreover, on the other hand, the AMD Ryzen 3 performed better in terms of heat dissipation and the credit goes to its use of a metal interface. It has also improved the current heat sink fan design so the processor can remove the heat faster and in a better way. So in the past, many users complained that the AMD processors are often hot and can’t provide good performance, that is not the case now. The times have changed and the AMD processors are now more power-efficient and run much cooler compared to the Intel chips.

Also read: AMD Vs Intel: Who’s The Showstopper?

AMD Ryzen 3 vs Intel Core i3: Pricing and Availability

When it comes to availability the AMD Ryzen 3 processors are available from Rs. 12,299 for the base version and goes up as you need more power and cores. On the other hand, the Intel Core i3 12th Gen processors start from Rs.16,600. Both the processors offer on-par performance but if you want the best you can also opt for the latest Intel Core i3 12300 processors which are a bit expensive. But you will have the latest new Laminar RM1 cooler, compatible memory, and other things to consider. Lastly, you can always get the latest laptops from AMD or Intel to get more value for money.

Conclusion

With the release of Ryzen 3 processors, AMD is particularly targeting budget gaming audiences who don’t have a lot of money to build expensive systems. Buyers can get more performance in terms of multithreaded applications compared to the Intel Core i3 processors. But those buyers who only require a basic system that can be used for day-to-day tasks will be better suited with the Core i3 processors as they have an integrated GPU that AMD fails to offer.

But you should keep in mind that while the Intel CPUs do come with an integrated GPU you can’t expect a great 1080p performance out of the Core i3. In that case, AMD still offers better quad-core performance for a lesser price tag. The more attractive choice for budget gamers will obviously be AMD instead of the Intel Core i3 CPUs.

This is what AMD has been doing with its latest launch of Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 7 processors. The company has standardized all of its CPU configurations so that buyers can easily compare the performances between all three line-ups. Moreover, this is how AMD with its Ryzen 3 provides better overall performance and rises as a competitor for the Core i3 processors.

But if you have got cash in your pocket and don’t mind spending it then the overall better choice would be the Intel Core i3 processors which offer integrated graphic cards. Not to say AMD Ryzen 3 are not capable those processors are good options if you are looking to save some money and also want some solid performance.

Also Read: Guide To Buy the Right Graphics Card For PC In 2022

Akhil Taneja

Explore More >

I am an Android Enthusiast and a Ninja at content creation. I love writing anything about technology and pro at reviewing smartphones. Big time expert in multiple facets of content generation

7 Best Free Mac Apps Every Mac Owner Should Have In 2022

5 Fastest Laptops In The World: Our Recommendations For 2022

Comments

Featured Videos

iQOO 9T Vs OnePlus 9RT Full Comparison: Which One To Buy?

We will discuss the iQOO 9T Vs OnePlus 9RT comparison in the article. Both phones come with the same price tag. In addition, both of these phones come with impressive specs and features. However, there exist some significant differences too. To know these differences, let’s explore the article and know which one to choose among the iQOO 9T &…

27th Sep 2022
Vivo V25 Pro Vs Oppo Reno8 FAQs Comparison

Today, we’ll talk about the Vivo V25 Pro Vs Oppo Reno8 and discuss some frequently asked questions. Both of these phones are excellent performers as well as competitors in the range of Rs 30,000 to 40,000. Moreover, both phones are camera-centric and have the same processor. However, the price difference between the two is around Rs 10,000. Let’s explore…

26th Sep 2022
How To Buy Apple iPhone 12 At 29,999 in India?

Are you planning to buy Apple iPhone 12 in India on Amazon and Flipkart Sale? Then, you should read this article to learn the best deals on how to buy Apple iPhone 12. It’s September 2022, and it’s the best time to buy Apple iPhone 12 in India. Furthermore, the sale on both platforms will…

22nd Sep 2022
How To Buy iPhone 13 At 34,999 In India?

Are you looking forward to buy Apple iPhone 13 this time of year as well, like us? Yes, everyone in India is delighted, but not because of the holidays or the fact that they get time off from work. But because the Amazon Great India Festival Sale and the Flipkart Big Billion Days sale will…

22nd Sep 2022
Samsung Galaxy S21 FE Vs OnePlus 9RT FAQs Comparison

We’ll talk about the Samsung Galaxy S21 FE Vs OnePlus 9RT, which are competitors in this smartphone category from Samsung and OnePlus, respectively. Moreover, both of these phones were released in 2022, and although they have a few minor changes. However, they target a similar audience. In this post, we’ll compare the Samsung Galaxy S21 FE and…

22nd Sep 2022

Latest Reviews

View All

Samsung Galaxy Book 2 Pro Review: Power-Packed With Performance

23rd May 2022
Acer Predator Helios 300 Review: Most Recommended Gaming Laptop at Solid Price

13th May 2022
Asus Zenbook 14 Flip Review: Classy And Powerful But Priced High

12th May 2022
HP Pavilion 15 Review: Mid-Range Laptop with Great Performance

6th May 2022
HP Victus 16 Review – A Valuable Gaming Choice

22nd Apr 2022

Best Recharge Plans

All Jio Prepaid Recharge Plans for October 2022

All BSNL Prepaid Recharge Plans For October 2022

All Vi Prepaid Recharge Plans List for October 2022

All Jio Postpaid Recharge Plans

All BSNL Postpaid Recharge Plans Online

You May Also Read

Vivo Mobile Phones With 4000mAh Battery Price List

Vivo has launched some of the best handsets in 2022 with great specs and features. One such important feature for a smartphone user is the size of the battery of their smartphone. Some people change their smartphones only because they are looking for a phone with a larger battery. We have made a list of…

Our Picks

View All

5 Best Water Geysers In India October 2022

6th Oct 2022

How To Remove Bloatware From HP Laptop: An Easy Guide

6th Oct 2022

5 Best Honeywell Air Purifiers In India October 2022

6th Oct 2022

Google Pixel 7 Pro, Pixel 7 Launch Event: How To Watch Livestream

6th Oct 2022

5 Best Philips Air Purifiers In India October 2022

6th Oct 2022

Recent News

View All

Infinix Zero Ultra 5G With Xboy Explorer NFT Collection

6th Oct 2022

Moto E32 Now Near You, In India

6th Oct 2022

Xiaomi Smart Band 7 Pro Leads Its Smart Way

5th Oct 2022

The Much Awaited Tablet From The House Of Redmi Just Landed!

5th Oct 2022

Pixel 7 And Pixel 7 Pro: Pre-Ordering Starts Tomorrow!

5th Oct 2022

New Launches

Dell Inspiron 15 3515 (D560710WIN9S) (AMD Dual Core Ryzen 3/8 GB/1 TB/Windows 11)

Starting from:

₹40,880

HP Pavilion x360 14-dy1010TU (533U0PA) (Core i5 11th Gen/16 GB/512 GB SSD/Windows 11)

Starting from:

₹73,990

Fujitsu UH-X 4ZR1F38024 (Core i7 11th Gen/16 GB/512 GB SSD/Windows 11)

Starting from:

₹83,590

Xiaomi Notebook Pro 120G (Core i5 12th Gen/16 GB/512 GB SSD/Windows 11)

Starting from:

₹74,990

Lenovo Thinkpad T14 (20W0S0TD00) (Core i7 11th Gen/32 GB/512 GB SSD/Windows 10)

Starting from:

₹1,59,890

Xiaomi Notebook Pro 120 (Core i5 12th Gen/16 GB/512 GB SSD/Windows 11)

Starting from:

₹78,999

Nokia PureBook Pro 15. 6 (Core i3 12th Gen/8 GB/512 GB SSD/Windows 11)

Lenovo ThinkBook 13s Gen 2 (20V9A036IH) (Core i7 11th Gen/16 GB/512 GB SSD/DOS)

Starting from:

₹95,990

Acer Swift 3 OLED (NX.KAVSI.002) (Core i5 12th Gen/16 GB/512 GB SSD/Windows 11)

Starting from:

₹89,999

Asus VivoBook 14 X415JA-BV302WS (Core i3 10th Gen/8 GB/1 TB/Windows 11)

Starting from:

₹29,990

AMD Ryzen 3 1200 vs. Intel Core i3-7100: Battle of the Budget Titans

AMD continues to develop a new desktop platform Socket AM4. The recently introduced Ryzen 3 chips are the most affordable processors in the Summit Ridge family, high-performance 14nm Zen architecture CPUs. What are quad-core models with an unlocked multiplier and a price of just over $100 in practice? To deal with the issue in detail, we have prepared a confrontation of processors of a similar cost — AMD Ryzen 3 1200 vs. Intel Core i3-7100.

Help

Zmist

1 AMD Ryzen 3
2 AMD Ryzen 3 1200 vs. Intel Core i3-7100
3 Maternal board
4 RAM
5 video card
6 cooling
7 in the work
8 Acceleration
9 Configuration
10 Energy
11
13 Results
- - 13.0.1 Intel Core i3-7100 processor provided for testing by Euro Plus, www.eplus.kiev.ua
    AMD Ryzen 3 1200 provided for testing by AMD, www.amd.com

AMD Ryzen 3

Ryzen 3 uses the same silicon die as the older processors. The chip is manufactured by GlobalFoundries using the 14nm process technology. In the case of Ryzen 3, half of the computing cores are deactivated. Curiously, not one of the CPU Complex (CCX) blocks is disabled, but two cores from each module. In this case, the two pairs of cores for interaction need to use the Infinity Fabric bus, which runs at the frequency of the memory controller. On the one hand, it would be more logical to use entirely one CXX, however, the method involved allows, for example, to use crystals that have a technological defect in both CXXs. In addition, this method allows you to more evenly distribute heat over the area of the crystal, simplifying its removal.

The new series includes two models — Ryzen 3 1200 and Ryzen 3 1300X. Both are quad-core with SMT disabled and 8MB L3 cache. Ryzen 3 1200 has a frequency formula of 3.1 / 3.4 GHz and the ability to accelerate by an additional 50 MHz (XFR, Extended Frequency Range), while the older model has 3.5 / 3.7 GHz and an additional 200 MHz per core with sufficient cooling and CPU power consumption. In both cases, the thermal package of the chips is declared at 65 watts. Like the rest of the Ryzen line, the processors do not have integrated graphics. A Ryzen 3 based system requires a discrete graphics card.

The Ryzen 3 1200 has an MSRP of $109, while the Ryzen 3 1300X is listed at $129. AMD is positioning Ryzen 3 as an opponent for Intel’s Core i3 family of processors. The new chips offer twice as many processing cores for the same money. The advantage seems obvious, but not everything is so clear. With the existing nuances, we will deal with the course of the material.

	Cores/Threads	Frequency	XFR	Volume L3	TDP	Price
Ryzen 7 1800X	8/16	3.6/4.0 GHz	+100 MHz	16 MB	95 W	$499
Ryzen 7 1700X	8/16	3.4/3.8 GHz	+100 MHz	16 MB	95 W	$399
Ryzen 7 1700	8/16	3.0/3.7 GHz	+50 MHz	16 MB	65 W	$329
Ryzen 5 1600X	6/12	3. 6/4.0 GHz	+100 MHz	16 MB	95 W	$249
Ryzen 5 1600	6/12	3.2/3.6 GHz	+100 MHz	16 MB	65 W	$219
Ryzen 5 1500X	4/8	3.5/3.7 GHz	+200 MHz	16 MB	65 W	$189
Ryzen 5 1400	4/8	3.2/3.4 GHz	+50 MHz	8 MB	65 W	$169
Ryzen 3 1300X	4/4	3.5/3.7 GHz	+200 MHz	8 MB	65 W	$129
Ryzen 3 1200	4/4	3.1/3.4	+50 MHz	8 MB	65 W	$109

In the meantime, we can say that AMD has completed the formation of the Ryzen line as part of the new Socket AM4 desktop platform. Starting with the top 8-core 16-thread Ryzen 7, the developer subsequently introduced 4/6-core 8/12-thread Ryzen 5, leaving the most affordable solutions of the family for dessert — 4-core Ryzen 3. Thus, AMD lowers the entry threshold on Socket AM4, where Bristol Ridge hybrid chips and Athlon processors without integrated graphics will soon take the lowest positions.

AMD Ryzen 3 1200 vs. Intel Core i3-7100

Before announcing the confrontation between the most affordable chips in the AMD Ryzen 3 and Intel Core i3 line, a few words about the logic of selecting the main accompanying system components. These are questions you will definitely encounter when assembling the respective platforms.

As we have noted, the Ryzen 3 1200 has 4 cores. The SMT multithreading technology that is relevant for Ryzen 5/7 is disabled here, because the processor can process up to 4 data streams simultaneously. The CPU has a frequency formula of 3.1 / 3.4 GHz. In general, rather modest values. But here it is still worth recalling that we are talking about the most affordable 4-core processor costing a little over $100. During the load on all 4 cores, the operating frequency of the processor is 3100 MHz. With a load on two cores, the frequency rises to 3400 MHz, and if the task is single-threaded, then one of the cores is accelerated to 3450 MHz.

The processor has a total of 2 MB (4×512 KB) L2 cache, while the total L3 is 8 MB. Quantitative indicators for this class are good. The declared thermal package is 65 watts.

The recommended price for Ryzen 3 1200 is $109, but at the start of sales, the retail price of the processor in Ukraine is higher — about $130.

Core i3-7100 is the youngest model in its family. It is a dual core processor running at 3.9 GHz. The chip supports Hyper-Threading technology, which in some cases allows it to simultaneously process up to 4 data streams. Of course, logical multi-core does not fully replace physical computing units, but often allows you to get a noticeable performance boost.

Core i3-7100 does not support Turbo Boost technology, therefore, under load, both cores operate at the maximum specified frequency — 3.9 GHz. The chip has 512 KB (2×256 KB) of L2 cache and a total L3 cache of 3 MB. The processor has a more modest declared TDP — 51 watts.

Recommended price for Core i3-7100 is $117, in our retail this model has a similar price.

Motherboard

Ryzen 3 chips can be used with any Socket AM4 motherboard. A specific device must be chosen based on the requirements for functionality, but the combination of these 4-core models with a relatively inexpensive motherboard based on AMD B350 looks balanced. The cost of such models starts at about $85, while top-end devices based on this chipset are offered for $130-140. There are enough options to choose the optimal board for your tasks. The most important differences here are the number of available ports, expansion slots, network and audio codecs used, VRM configuration, and the presence of cooling elements. That is, we are talking about functional binding, which does not explicitly affect the performance of the system. Despite the moderate cost, motherboards based on AMD B350 allow you to overclock Ryzen processors. For frequency records, such models are still of little use, but for a moderate boost of the CPU, this is quite an option.

To test the Ryzen 3 1200, we used the MSI B350M MORTAR, a fairly simple mATX model. It differs from the most affordable models based on AMD B350 by the presence of a massive heatsink on power elements and 4 slots for memory modules. Otherwise, the functional set is typical for devices of this class. From marketing goodies, it can be noted that the manufacturer «poured» red illumination on all four corners of the PCB and packed the main PCI Express connector in a metal casing.

Ryzen 3 can also be used with the most affordable AMD A320-based boards starting at $60, but in this case, you need to discard the overclocking idea from the start. The chipset does not allow you to independently change the processor multiplier, so any installed CPU will only work in normal mode. Perhaps for some this will be a suitable option and a way to initially look towards a more expensive processor. Although, nevertheless, when using Ryzen processors with an unlocked multiplier, it is a pity to lose the opportunity for experimentation.

The other extreme would be to use Ryzen 3 motherboards based on the top AMD X370 chipset. The cost of such models starts from $130-140, and even $300 will not be enough to buy the most expensive ones. Situations when motherboards cost more than used processors are quite acceptable, but these are rather not typical, but special cases and owners of such systems are well aware of why they needed a model with extended functionality.

As for the Intel platform, the most affordable Core i3 models do not need a board with overclocking capabilities. A locked reference frequency multiplier does not allow you to speed up the CPU even on top-end expensive motherboards. In the budget version, you can even use motherboards based on Intel h210 ($55-85), but if you don’t focus on the most affordable solutions, models based on Intel B250 ($75-140) are more interesting in terms of equipment. At the time of preparing the material, we had at our disposal a full-format ASUS ROG STRIX B250F GAMING board, the possibilities of which we had previously considered. This is one of the most expensive options in its class and in this case no more than an example for Core i3 tests. If extended functionality is not required, you can choose a noticeably more affordable version on the Intel B250, and this will not affect system performance in any way.

To summarize, we see that motherboards of the same class for AMD and Intel chips differ little in price. In both cases, the minimum cost of the platform starts at $55-60, and for about $100 you can already pick up a model with 4 slots for memory modules, VRM cooling, enough USB and high-speed M.2.

RAM

In terms of RAM support, Ryzen 3 chips do not have any restrictions compared to older models. The processors are ready to work with modules up to DDR4-3200. At the same time, memory in this mode can theoretically be used even on the most affordable motherboards with basic AMD A320 chipsets. Another issue is that high-speed modules are noticeably more expensive than standard DDR4-2400/DDR4-2666. It is quite possible that strips with a lower declared frequency will work in DDR4-3200 mode after self-overclocking, but there is no guarantee, especially given Ryzen’s selectivity in terms of high-speed modules. Nevertheless, there are no technical problems, and the effectiveness of DDR4-3200 can be judged in the practical part of the material.

As for the Intel platform, for processors of the kaby Lake family, which includes the Core i3-7100, DDR4-2400 is standard. It is this mode that is the boundary when using motherboards that do not support overclocking. In a budget system, one of the models based on Intel h210 / B250 / h370 or devices based on PCH of previous generations — Intel B150 / h270 will most likely be used. Boards based on Intel Z270/Z170 allow you to use faster RAM, but such boards are rarely used in conjunction with Core i3. However, the effect of increasing the memory bandwidth on the Intel platform will be noticeably more modest, so such a limitation cannot be called a cause for concern.

Video card

As we have already noted, a discrete video card is required for the system to work. The specific model depends on the real needs and capabilities of the system owner. It can be either the most affordable PCI Express slot cover — GeForce 210 for $35, or the top-end GeForce GTX 1080 Ti costing about $1000. If we are talking about a rational gaming system, it is quite possible to pair Ryzen 3 with a mid-range video card of the GeForce GTX 1060 or Radeon RX 570/580 level. This combination looks not only realistic, but also justified in terms of the balance of components.

For our experiments, we used the ASUS DUAL-RX580-O8G, the original Radeon RX 580 8 GB model with a frequency formula of 1360/8000 MHz. Yes, yes, video cards of this line are still seriously overvalued after the peak of the cryptocurrency fever, and given the recent increase in the price of Bitcoin to $3,500 and the accompanying increase in the cost of Ethereum, it is still difficult to predict when devices with AMD chips will again become a justified purchase for gamers. For these purposes, devices with NVIDIA GPUs are now more interesting. However, in our case, this does not make a fundamental difference. Now, first of all, the difference in gaming performance between Ryzen 3 and Core i3 when using a mid-range graphics card is interesting.

Cooling

The Ryzen 3 is retailed with the stock AMD Wraith Stealth cooling system. As with the base Core i3 cooler, the cooler is based on a fairly simple aluminum construction.

At the same time, the radiator profile of the AMD processor cooler is still somewhat larger and is equipped with a more massive fan with a diameter of 90 mm. Whereas the stock Intel cooler comes with an 80mm fan. In both cases, no additional copper heat sinks or heat pipes are provided.

Coolers are initially coated with a heat-conducting compound. In the case of the Ryzen cooler, the paste is distributed evenly over the entire area of the heat sink. Segmentation on the heatsink from Intel assumes that during heating, the paste will occupy the empty niches between the chip and the surface of the heatsink.

As for installing the cooler, to mount the stock AMD cooler, you must first remove the plastic brackets that were originally attached to the motherboard in the area of the processor socket. To do this, you need to unscrew a couple of screws with a Phillips screwdriver. A regular Wraith Stealth cooler is installed in the vacated space. Knurled heads make it easy to “bait” the screws, after which they are tightened to the stop using the same screwdriver.

Additional plastic brackets on boards with Socket AM4 connector are originally provided for coolers with pressure plate. As you can see, the standard Wraith Stealth uses a different fixing principle, but installing the cooler does not take much time anyway.

In operation

The supplied cooler is enough to cool the processor in normal mode. During experiments at rest, the temperature of the chip was about 35°C, while the fan speed varied between 750–800 rpm.

Under load in the CPU stress test, the chip temperature was kept within 60 degrees, while the fan speed increased to only 1200 rpm. In general, the cooler is very quiet. Despite the relatively simple design, this is a decent option if you do not plan to overclock the processor.

If desired, you can increase the fan speed yourself. In this case, 100% corresponds to a frequency of about 2500 rpm. In this mode, the noise level rises, the cooler will most likely be heard from the closed case. Of course, the cooling efficiency in this mode is increased. Under maximum load, the processor temperature did not exceed 50C.

As in the case of the AMD cooler, the operating mode of the Intel cooler depends on the calibration and the specified algorithm, which you can always correct yourself. In automatic mode, at rest, the fan speed was about 950–1000 rpm. At the same time, the temperature of the Core i3-7100 was kept at 32-34 degrees. After a half-hour load session in the AIDA64 stability test, the processor warmed up to 57C, while the fan speed increased to about 1700 rpm. The results obtained in the AIDA64 stress test correspond to realistic high-load scenarios, but to test under extreme conditions, we also warmed up the CPU in the OCCT utility. In this case, the peak heating of the Core i3-7100 increased to 65-67 degrees, and the fan speed increased to 2400 rpm.

The maximum rotation speed of the stock Intel cooler is 3000 rpm. In this mode, it cools the processor down to 58-61C even when loaded in OCCT, but the cooler in this case is too loud.

Overclocking

Judging by the first results, the frequency potential of Ryzen 3 differs little from that of older Ryzen chips. This means that 4-core processors will often be able to work stably at frequencies of 3.9-4.1 GHz. The limit modes will differ for each specific case, but on average the indicators are just that.

To overclock the CPU, it is desirable to use an efficient cooling system. Regular coolers are often simply unsuitable for such conditions. However, when it comes to relatively inexpensive platforms, their owners usually have other conditions and opportunities. It is unlikely that someone will buy a processor for $100 and spend a similar amount on an efficient cooler, only for a good overclocking of the chip. For this money, you can already initially purchase a much more powerful CPU and not bother with forcing frequencies at all. For this reason, we decided to limit ourselves to a stock cooler and see what you can expect when overclocking the Ryzen 3 1200 without the additional cost of buying an original cooler.

During the experiments, we managed to get stable operation of the chip at 3800 MHz at 1. 3875 V. To cool the processor, we initially increased the cooler fan speed to a maximum of 2500 rpm. In this mode, the standard cooler cooled the overclocked CPU to quite acceptable 65 degrees. But to further increase the frequency, it would be necessary to increase the supply voltage of the chip, which would further increase its power consumption/heat dissipation. And here it would not have been possible without replacing the cooler.

Received 3800 MHz with a «boxed» cooler — a very good result. Especially considering that it did not require any additional costs.

As we already mentioned, overclocking is not provided for the Core i3-7100. The multiplier blocked for increase does not allow to increase the processor clock speed, because the dual-core chip works under load at the standard 3.9 GHz. In fairness, it must be recalled that in the current Core i3 line there is still one model with an unlocked multiplier — Core i3-7350K (4.2 GHz), but the recommended price is $179against the background of $182 for a 4-core Core i5-7400, this chip is the lot of a limited number of enthusiasts.

Test bench configuration

Processor	Intel Core i3-7100 (3.9 GHz)	Euro Plus, www.eplus.kiev.ua
Processor	AMD Ryzen 3 1200 (3.1/3.4 GHz)	AMD, www.amd.com
Motherboard	ASUS ROG STRIX B250F GAMING (Intel B250)	ASUS, www.asus.ua
Motherboard	MSI B350M MORTAR (AMD B350)	MSI, www.msi.com
Video card	ASUS DUAL-RX580-O8G (Radeon RX 580 8 GB)	ASUS, www.asus.ua
Memory	HyperX Fury HX426C15FBK2/16, HyperX Savage HX430C15SBK4/16	HyperX, www.hyperxgaming.com
Accumulator	HyperX Savage 960 GB (SHSS37A/960G)	HyperX, www.hyperxgaming.com
Power supply	Thermaltake Toughpower Grand TPG-1200M (1200 W)	Thermaltake, www. thermaltakeusa.com
Monitor	Acer Predator XB271HK (27″, 3840×2160)	Acer, www.acer.ua

Performance

Before evaluating the performance of the participants, let’s designate the modes used. The dual-core processor Core i3-7100 is presented in the final diagrams in a single variant. This is a regular mode for him with an operating frequency of 3900 MHz and RAM in dual-channel mode, which on the board with Intel B250 operates in the maximum allowable mode — DDR4-2400 (14-16-16-32). Despite the presence of the DDR4-2666 kit, a higher speed mode is not available.

The Ryzen 3 1200 chip is represented by three positions — stock mode 3100/3400 MHz and memory in DDR4-2666 mode (16-17-17-35), overclocking to 3800 MHz also with DDR4-2666 and a variant with overclocking to 3800 MHz plus RAM acceleration up to DDR4-3200 (16-16-16-39).

Initially, we propose to estimate the bandwidth of the memory subsystem. AMD chips have an advantage here, and this applies both to the memory bandwidth directly to the RAM, and to caches of all levels. But the latency of working with memory is better for the Intel processor. However, quantitative indicators here are more of academic interest. Let’s see how this will be reflected in practice.

The first application and the first local success of the Ryzen 3 1200. In the Cinebench R15 test with multi-threaded rendering, the AMD processor in the normal mode is 14.5% faster than the Core i3-7100. Overclocking and high-speed memory completely bring the gap to an indecent 42%. The enemy is defeated and retires to lick his wounds? Let’s not rush.

Indicators in single-stream mode — an alarm bell. In this case, even a noticeable afterburner does not allow the Ryzen 3 1200 not only to overtake, but even come close to the Core i3-7100. In normal modes, the difference is 22.5%, and overclocking only allows you to reduce the backlog to 7. 2%.

WinRAR 5.4 is another victory for Core i3. Although the archiver can work in multi-threaded mode, it does not fully load the resources of the computing cores, and is very sensitive to memory latency. The final results are presented in the diagram.

But 7-Zip is very welcoming and grateful for the available computing resources. Here we observe a 10% advantage of the Ryzen 3 1200 even in normal mode and more than a significant superiority of the AMD chip after overclocking — 32.6%.

In the test stages with rendering scenes in Blender 2.78 and Fryrender, the situation is very similar. Despite the multi-threading of these applications, the dual-core but 4-thread Core i3 manages to marginally outperform the Ryzen 3 1200 in stock mode. The latter took 2–5% more time to complete the task. However, overclocking allows not only to even out the situation, but also to provide a noticeable advantage (~15%) to the AMD chip.

Working with video is another very resource-intensive task that, although highly parallelized, takes a very long time. Surely, many who are used to uploading their useful videos to YouTube have already appreciated the complexity of pre-editing and video processing.

Here, the Ryzen 3 1200 already feels very confident, even in the basic version offering a little more performance than its counterpart. About 5% faster, he coped with transcoding a 4K video fragment to 1080p (H.265) in Handbrake 1.0.7. And during the final rendering of 4K video in Adobe Premier Pro CC, the platform with the AMD chip turned out to be 7% faster. Moreover, increasing the operating frequency can significantly improve the results of the Ryzen 3 1200. But, it is important not to overdo it here, so that due to possible failures under load, you do not lose the work done. DDR4-3200 memory also brings tangible benefits here.

Synthetic tests PerformanceTest 9 and GeekBench 4.1.1 prefer the 4-core Ryzen 3 in the integrated score. + 11-13% in the base and up to 33-35% after overclocking and using a high-speed RAM kit. However, GeekBench once again reminds of the significant advantage of the Core i3 in terms of one thread.

The results in PCMark tests are a good example of the fact that you can’t always rely on multithreading. In particular, familiar office applications often do not have appropriate optimizations, so the efficiency of the architecture is more important. AMD has significantly increased Ryzen’s performance per clock compared to what was seen with previous generation chips, but this may not always be enough. As you can see, the Core i3-7100 chip runs faster on PCMark office runs, and the moderate overclocking of Ryzen 3 only allows you to get close to the performance of the fast Intel dual-core processor.

Both chips can be previewed in 3DMark. The multi-threaded processor subtests show the advantage of the Ryzen 3 1200, but the difference in overall scores is relatively small.

Games

To evaluate system performance in games, we used Full HD resolution with medium graphics quality settings. This mode has been upgraded for the Radeon RX 580 8 GB and will already allow us to evaluate the impact of processors on the overall frame rate.

In most cases, a Core i3-7100 platform is marginally faster than a Ryzen 3 1200 in normal mode. The low frequencies of the AMD processor here play a cruel joke with it. The number of projects that can effectively use multi-core processors is increasing, but performance per thread is still very important for many games.

Often the difference is small and if desired, the difference can be compensated by overclocking the processor. As a rule, the use of DDR4-3200 memory also brings a few additional percent of the performance increase, so if the indicators are fundamentally important, you should focus on high-speed RAM.

Summarizing the gaming capabilities of both processors, we can talk about a certain parity of both processors. The Core i3-7100 scores with its performance architecture and high base frequency, the Ryzen 3 wins back with twice the number of processing cores, fast RAM, and overclocking capability.

Power Consumption

Thermal Package (TDP) is often only a vague indication of the processor’s actual power consumption. Rather, it is some recommended value for choosing a cooling system. Therefore, the declared 51W for the Core i3-7100 and 65W for the Ryzen 3 1200 can be used as a baseline, but the actual measurements have additional value.

Ryzen 3 1200-based system consumes only slightly more power than the Core i3 platform in normal mode and at rest and under load. For AMD solutions, this is a great success. Especially when it comes to a 4-core processor and a comparison with the parameters of a dual-core Intel chip. Overall 80-90W during video encoding and 100-110W under OCCT, this is a very good overall result. After overclocking, power consumption increases noticeably, because in order to increase the frequency, the processor supply voltage must also be increased.

Results

The Ryzen 3 1200 is an interesting entry-level processor in the AMD cage and a very worthy opponent for the Core i3-7100. Both chips have their strengths and weaknesses — in general, a typical situation for chips of the same class with fundamentally different architectures.

More cores make Ryzen 3 often look better in multi-threaded workloads. However, this is not a dogma. An efficient architecture, high operating frequency and Hyper-Threading support often allow an Intel chip to show decent results against a daring newcomer. After additional overclocking, the Ryzen 3 1200 often still manages to get into a small lead, in especially successful cases, up to 20-40%. But in conditions of weak multi-threaded optimization, even additional afterburner and faster memory do not always allow the AMD processor to be on the podium. The Core i3 also has integrated graphics. For a gaming platform, it is useless, but can help out in some situations.

In general, the appearance of Ryzen 3 can only be welcomed. Finally, we have real competition in the $100-150 price range. Perhaps for an even more aggressive nick with Intel’s entry-level chips, AMD should have used lower recommended price tags. After all, in addition to the Core i3, the main competitor also has Pentium chips, which, after the activation of Hyper-Threading, turned out to be so severe that they ruined sales of more expensive CPUs. In any case, AMD’s price factor will still have to be used. For example, after the launch of Intel processors of the Coffee Lake family. But, it will be a completely different story and certainly interesting. Don’t switch.

Intel Core i3-7100 processor provided for testing by Euro Plus, www.eplus.kiev.ua

AMD Ryzen 3 1200 processor provided for testing by AMD, www.amd.com

delicious coffee for a low price! GECID.com. Page 1

::>Processors
>2018
> Comparison of Intel Core i3-8100 with AMD Ryzen 3 1300X, FX-8350 and Core i5-4690K: delicious coffee for a low price!

12-01-2018

Page 1
Page 2
One page

The main focus during the presentation of the Intel Coffee Lake line was shifted towards 6-core K-series models with an unlocked multiplier. However, the focus of public attention is drawn to the first 4-core processors of the Intel Core i3 series. Let’s evaluate their capabilities using the example of the most accessible representative.

For a long time, the Intel Core i3 series included exclusively 2-core 4-thread solutions, and for a full-fledged 4-core solution, you had to go up to the Core i5 series. Qualitative evolutionary changes in this regard began in 2017 with the release of the Pentium Kaby Lake series. They quickly won people’s love and respect, providing the same 2 cores and 4 threads as the representatives of the Core i3 series. Yes, with slightly lower clock speeds, but at a much more attractive price.

And in order to raise interest in the Core i3 series, improving its attractiveness against the background of external and internal competitors, it was decided to provide the user with full-fledged four cores with a corresponding increase in cache memory.

The most affordable representative of the line at the time of preparation of the material was the Intel Core i3-8100. Its base frequency is 3.6 GHz. There is still no support for Turbo Boost technology — apparently, Intel saved this feature for the next series, so the speed cannot be increased dynamically.

If we compare the new product with its predecessor in the face of the Intel Core i3-7100, we will see an increase in the number of cores from 2 to 4 with a proportional increase in the cache memory of all three levels and a decrease in the clock frequency from 3.9 to 3.6 GHz, with an increase in the thermal package from 51 to 65 watts.

The RAM controller now only supports DDR4 memory. You are guaranteed to be able to install modules in 2-channel mode with a total capacity of up to 64 GB with a frequency of 2400 MHz. But if you have a motherboard based on the Intel Z370 chipset, you can try to overclock the memory to higher speeds.

In turn, iGPU changed only the name — instead of HD Graphics 630 we get UHD Graphics 630, as well as adding support for OpenGL version 4. 5 instead of 4.4. It uses the same microarchitecture and has 23 execution units active. The clock frequencies have not changed either: 350 MHz at nominal and up to 1100 in dynamic overclocking. In older models, the number of execution units rises to 24, and the speed in turbo mode also increases.

Outward changes also include redesign of the package from more stylish and calm to more colorful and catchy. The package traditionally includes a compact processor cooler, the design of which has not undergone visible changes. It still consists of a small rounded aluminum heatsink and a 7-blade axial fan. Thermal paste is applied to the base, and a 4-pin connector is used for connection.

The official price tag of the novelty remained at $117, although in reality their prices differ. For example, in the US market, the Intel Core i3-8100 can be found for $130, while $110 is asked for its predecessor. In the domestic market, the difference is slightly lower: $136 and $126, respectively.

Unfortunately, we did not manage to get the Intel Core i3-7100 model for the test, so we used the Intel Core i5-4690K as another interesting opponent. It’s hard to find on sale, and the cost is much higher, but we thought that we need to compare the new product with 4-core previous generations and evaluate the performance changes due to the use of a new microarchitecture and memory.

The direct external competitor for the Intel Core i3-8100 is the 4-core AMD Ryzen 3 1300X. The box version of which is a couple of dollars more expensive, and the tray version is a little cheaper. At the time of testing, we did not have this CPU, so we decided to make an analogue from AMD Ryzen 5 1400. To do this, we simply turned off SMT technology, getting 4 cores and 4 threads, and also set the frequency at 3.6 GHz — this is exactly the indicator in The load was demonstrated by the recently tested Ryzen 3 1300X. And the cache memory of all three levels is the same for them.

And the final competitor is the 8-core AMD FX-8350, which can still be found in the same $136 category. In single-threaded mode, he, of course, is inferior to his opponents, but in multi-threaded mode, he should have a chance.

Now a few words about test configurations. The Intel Core i3-8100 was tested on a GIGABYTE Z370 AORUS Ultra Gaming board with 16 GB of Patriot Viper 4 RAM. And the Thermalright Archon SB-E X2 cooler was responsible for its cooling. Under load in the stress test, the maximum temperature of the cores did not exceed 46 ° with a critical indicator of 100 °.

Base test configuration:

Intel Core i3-8100
GIGABYTE Z370 AORUS Ultra Gaming
Thermalright Archon SB-E X2
Inno3D iChill GeForce GTX 1080 X3
2x8GB DDR4-3200 Patriot Viper 4
GOODRAM Iridium PRO 240GB
GOODRAM Iridium PRO 960GB
Seagate IronWolf 2TB
Seasonic PRIME 850W Titanium
AOC U2879VF

The Intel Core i5-4690K was tested using an ASRock Z97 Extreme6 motherboard, 16GB G. Skill TridentX DDR3 RAM, and the same cooler.

The Ryzen series was tested on a familiar bench with an MSI X370 SLI PLUS motherboard, Patriot Viper 4 RAM, and be quiet! Silent loop.

AMD FX-8350 paired with ASRock Fatal1ty 990FX Killer motherboard, 2-channel DDR3 G.Skill TridentX kit and Noctua NH-U12P cooler.

Inno3D iChill GeForce GTX 1080 X3 was used in all cases. And the disk subsystem included a GOODRAM Iridium PRO series SSD and a 2-terabyte Seagate IronWolf HDD.

We will compare processors in two stages. First, we compare their results in the nominal mode when running synthetic and gaming tests, and then in overclocking. The base memory frequency was selected based on the maximum guaranteed performance of each processor. That is, for Intel Core i3-8100 — this is DDR4-2400 mode, for i5-4690K is DDR3-1600, AMD Ryzen 3 is DDR4-2667 and FX-8350 is DDR3-1866.

In AIDA64 AMD Ryzen 3 1300X proved to be the best of all, which is ahead of Intel Core i3-8100 by 14-22% in operations of copying, reading and writing information to RAM.

But in terms of data access latency, the Intel Core i5-4690K is already in the lead, although the 4-core Intel Core i3 is only 2% behind.

In the 7-Zip archiver, AMD FX-8350 took the lead, outperforming the tested new product by an impressive 23-65%.

A similar situation is observed in WinRAR , however, the gap is reduced to 45%.

Scene rendering in the Corona was once again best done by a representative of the ever-young AMD FX series. But the Core i3 took 13% more time to do this.

Interestingly, in V-Ray the Core i3-8100 is already 10 -26 seconds ahead of the rest of its competitors.

Video encoding in benchmark x265 again brings a novelty to Olympus, which took a little more than 78 seconds on average. The opponents were 6-9 seconds behind.

In CineBench R15 , the Core i3 looks the best. Yes, it finished second in the CPU test, trailing AMD FX-8350 by 5%, but in OpenGL it had no equal. He was ahead of his competitors by 6-47%.

And, finally, in RealBench , the Intel Core i3-8100 takes the lead again in the final result. Intel Core i5-469 climbed to second place0K, only 2% behind the winner. But in heavy multitasking, it was AMD FX that did it all.

Now it’s time for gaming benchmarks. Let us remind you once again that we used those projects that are typical representatives of their classes. That is, some games are highly dependent on the performance of the processor in single-threaded mode, others support multi-threading with weak optimization, and still others, on the contrary, can perfectly load all available cores and threads. The test also includes representatives of heavy network shooters, which are characterized by conditional repeatability of results, but they are very popular and indicative for many. And, of course, in some games we deliberately used the maximum presets in order to rest against the video card and evaluate whether there would be a difference in this case.

In a word, games and settings were chosen in such a way as to explore different classes of projects and different scenarios for their work, making the test more complex.

Let’s start with Assassin’s Creed Origins . Maximum settings at HD resolution allow you to reduce the load on the video card in order to better assess the impact of the processor. In this mode, it was the Intel Core i3-8100 that did the best. He averaged 62 FPS with drawdowns up to 43. Yes, and his frame time schedule was calmer.

Far Cry Primal in HD at ultra once again proves that AMD has done a good job in terms of increasing the IPS score, and now the AMD Ryzen 3 1300X can compete on equal terms with the Core i5-4690K, but 4- the nuclear Core i3 still pulls ahead by 17%.

Similar quality settings in Rainbow Six Siege again demonstrate the advantage of models from Intel. At the same time, the 4-core novelty was ahead of its older opponent by only 7-19%, although there are 3 generations of processors between them.

In WATCH_DOGS 2 at ultra settings and HD resolution, we expected that 4 additional streams of the FX-8350 and a higher frequency would provide it with a lead, but again the Intel Core i3-8100 turned out to be the first. The difference between the first and fourth place does not exceed 5-9 FPS, which is equivalent to 16-25%.

Change of leader occurred when benchmark Middle-earth Shadow of War 9 was launched0062 in HD resolution with ultra preset. Core i5 showed the best results, outperforming Core i3 by 3-6%. But the FX-8350 noticeably lagged behind the leader by 23-27%.

But there is reason to praise the «old man» in the Rise of the Tomb Raider benchmark: he alone was able to completely form the Geothermal Valley scene, without additional loading of objects as the camera moves. But this distorted the final results, so we use the «Syria» scene. Olympus again captures the Core i3 with a 13-22% lead over the nearest pursuer.

If the system is built for heavy network shooters like Battlefield 1 at Full HD resolution and ultra graphics settings, then in the nominal mode the Intel Core i3-8100 looks the best. Yes, it lagged behind the Core i5 in terms of average by 1 FPS, but in terms of the minimum it was ahead of it by 7 frames / s. And among AMD chips, it is the FX-8350 that looks better.

The third Witcher at maximum graphics presets looks most comfortable on the test new product, which produces an average of 80 FPS with drawdowns up to 65. The non-new Core i5 looks a little better than the FX-8350, and the Ryzen 3 turned out to be an obvious outsider due to for a lower minimum frame rate.

In the GTA V benchmark, at very high graphics settings and Full HD resolution, the situation returns to the usual picture: the leadership for the new Core i3 with a small margin from the Core i5, and Ryzen 3 rises to third place. Yes, and the frame time graph of Intel processors is smoother and more relaxed than that of their competitors.

In Ghost Recon Wildlands , we deliberately chose Full HD resolution and a very high graphics preset to hit the graphics card. However, the differences between the systems were fixed. The bundle with the Intel Core i3-8100 proved to be the best, and the configuration with AMD FX was in last place. The difference between them was 30%.

The first stage is completed by the game PUBG at Full HD resolution and ultra preset. The system with Core i3 coped exemplary with it, which produced an average of 100 FPS with drawdowns of up to 71. The second was Core i5, which was 2-3 FPS ahead of the configuration with Ryzen 3.

Comparison of test results of processors in the nominal mode:

Core i3-8100 vs Core i5-4690K, min FPS, %

Core i3-8100 vs Core i5-4690K, avg FPS, %

Core i3-8100 vs Ryzen 3 1300X, min FPS, %

Core i3-8100 vs Ryzen 3 1300X, avg FPS, %

Core i3-8100 vs FX-8350, min FPS, %

Core i3-8100 vs FX-8350, avg FPS, %

Battlefield 1 Full HD Ultra

19. 4

-1.5

115

54.8

38.7

27.5

Assassin’s Creed Origins HD Max

7.5

10.7

22.9

21.6

22.9

19.2

Far Cry Primal, HD, Ultra

17.2

12.6

17.2

16.7

47.8

44.1

Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six Siege, HD, Ultra

18.7

6.5

34.8

22.7

66.1

25.3

WATCH_DOGS 2, HD, Ultra

6. 1

7.1

16.7

25.0

16.7

18.4

Middle-earth Shadow of War, HD, Ultra

-2.7

-6.0

10.6

1.9

32.7

22.5

Rise of the Tomb Raider, Full HD, Very High, Syria

13.0

21.7

13.8

30.5

68.5

76.2

PUBG, Full HD, Ultra

26.8

13.6

34.0

16.3

65.1

51.5

The Witcher 3, HD, Max

12. 1

9.6

35.4

21.2

16.1

19.4

GTA V Full HD Very High

6.3

6.1

24.4

20.7

64.5

55.6

Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon Wildlands, Full HD, Very High

7.4

8.5

17.4

21.5

28.8

29.6

Average

12.0

8.1

31.1

23.0

42.5

35.4

Let’s summarize the intermediate results. In synthetic tests, the Intel Core i3-8100 is ahead of the Ryzen 3 by an average of 6%, the «old» Core i5 by 9%, and the FX-8350 by 12%. In games, it looks even better, because it bypasses the Intel Core i5-4690K by 8-12%, Ryzen 3 by 23-31%, and the FX-8350 by 35 to 43%.

AMD Ryzen 5 1400 vs Intel Core i3-7100: What is the difference?

smartphonesgraphic cardswireless headphonesCPU

40 Ballla

AMD Ryzen 5 1400 9000

50 Ballla

Intel Core i3-7100

VS

64 Facts compared to

AMD Ryzen 5 1400

Intel Core i3-7100

Why AMD Ry 5,000 more Intel Core i3-7100?

1.64x higher CPU speed?
4 x 3.2GHz vs 2 x 3.9GHz

267MHz higher RAM speed?
2667MHz vs 2400MHz

4 more CPU threads?
8 vs 4

1.5MB more L2 cache?
2MB vs 0.5MB

30.99% higher PassMark score?
7816 vs 5967

5MB more L3 cache?
8MB vs 3MB

128KB more L1 cache?
256KB vs 128KB

Has an unlocked multiplier?

Why is Intel Core i3-7100 better than AMD Ryzen 5 1400?

5°C higher than maximum operating temperature?
100°C vs 95°C

14W below TDP?
51W vs 65W

Does it have integrated graphics?

16. 93% higher PassMark score (single)?
2231 vs 1908

Has AES?

Has AVX?

Has F16C?

Has MMX?

What are the most popular comparisons?

AMD Ryzen 5 1400

VS

AMD Ryzen 5 5500U

Intel Core i3-7100

VS

Intel Pentium Silver N5000

AMD Ryzen 5 1400

VS 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 CEN vs

Intel Pentium Gold G5400

AMD Ryzen 5 1400

VS

Intel Core i5-7400

Intel Core i3-7100

VS

AMD Ryzen 3 1200

AMD Ryzen 5 140003

Intel Core i3-10100

Intel Core i3-7100

VS

Intel Core i7-3770

AMD Ryzen 5 1400 900

AMD

Intel Core INTEL CORE INTEL CORE INTEL CORE INTEL CORE INTEL CORE

Intel Core i5-330 Ryzen3 2200G

Intel Core i3-7100

VS

Intel Core i5-4200u

AMD Ryzen 5 1400

VS

Intel Core i5-3470

Intel Core i3-7100

VS

INTEL IS

AMD RYZEN 5 1400 900

VS

AMD Ryzen 7 1800x

Intel Core i3-7100

VS

Intel Core i5-7200U
Reviews of Users

. AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AMICE

0 Reviews of Users

AMD Ryzen 5 1400 9000

0.0 /10

0 Reviews of users

Intel Core i3-7100

1 Reviews of Users

Intel Core i3-7100 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000

1 Reviews of users

Functions

The price ratio

reviews is not

7.0 /10

1 Votes

Games

reviews yet not

9.0 /10

1 Votes

performance

Reviews not yet

10.0 /10

1 Votes

Reliability

Reviews until

/ 10

1 Votes

Energy efficiency

Reviews not yet

7.0 /10

1 Votes

performance

1. Spanity of the central processor

4 x 3.2GHz

2 x 3.9GHz

CPU speed indicates how many processing cycles per second a processor can perform, considering all its cores (processors). It is calculated by adding the clock speeds of each core or, in the case of multi-core processors, each group of cores.

2.processor thread of execution

More threads result in better performance and better multitasking.

3.speed turbo clock

3.4GHz

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i3-7100)

When the processor is running below its limits, it can jump to a higher clock speed to increase performance.

4. Unlocked

✔AMD Ryzen 5 1400

✖Intel Core i3-7100

Some processors come with an unlocked multiplier and can be easily overclocked for better performance in games and other applications.

5.L2 cache

More L2 scratchpad memory results in faster results in CPU and system performance tuning.

6.L3 cache

More L3 scratchpad memory results in faster results in CPU and system performance tuning.

7.L1 cache

More L1 cache results in faster results in CPU and system performance tuning.

8.core L2

0.5MB/core

0.25MB/core

More data can be stored in L2 scratchpad for access by each processor core.

9.core L3

2MB/core

1.5MB/core

More data can be stored in the L3 scratchpad for access by each processor core.

Memory

1.RAM speed

2667MHz

2400MHz

Can support faster memory which speeds up system performance.

2.max memory bandwidth

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 5 1400)

38.4GB/s

This is the maximum rate at which data can be read from or stored in memory.

3. DDR version

DDR (Double Data Rate Synchronous Dynamic Random Access Memory) is the most common type of RAM. New versions of DDR memory support higher maximum speeds and are more energy efficient.

4.Memory channels

More memory channels increase the speed of data transfer between memory and processor.

5.max memory

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 5 1400)

Maximum amount of memory (RAM).

6.bus baud rate

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 5 1400)

The bus is responsible for transferring data between various components of a computer or device.

7. Supports memory debug code

✖AMD Ryzen 5 1400

✖Intel Core i3-7100

Memory debug code can detect and fix data corruption. It is used when necessary to avoid distortion, such as in scientific computing or when starting a server.

8.eMMC version

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 5 1400)

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i3-7100)

A newer version of eMMC — built-in flash memory card — speeds up the memory interface, has a positive effect on device performance, for example, when transferring files from a computer to internal memory via USB.

9.bus frequency

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 5 1400)

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i3-7100)

The bus is responsible for transferring data between various components of a computer or device

Geotagging

1. PassMark result

This benchmark measures CPU performance using multi-threading.

2. PassMark result (single)

This test measures processor performance using a thread of execution.

3.Geekbench 5 result (multi-core)

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 5 1400)

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i3-7100)

Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform benchmark that measures the performance of a multi-core processor. (Source: Primate Labs,2022)

4. Cinebench R20 result (multi-core)

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 5 1400)

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i3-7100)

Cinebench R20 is a benchmark that measures the performance of a multi-core processor by rendering a 3D scene.

5.Cinebench R20 result (single core)

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 5 1400)

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i3-7100)

Cinebench R20 is a test to evaluate the performance of a single core processor when rendering a 3D scene.

6.Geekbench 5 result (single core)

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 5 1400)

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i3-7100)

Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform benchmark that measures the single-core performance of a processor. (Source: Primate Labs, 2022)

7. Blender test result (bmw27)

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 5 1400)

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i3-7100)

The Blender benchmark (bmw27) measures CPU performance by rendering a 3D scene. More powerful processors can render a scene in a shorter time.

8. Blender result (classroom)

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 5 1400)

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i3-7100)

The Blender (classroom) benchmark measures CPU performance by rendering a 3D scene. More powerful processors can render a scene in a shorter time.

9.performance per watt

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i3-7100)

This means that the processor is more efficient, giving more performance per watt of power used.

Functions

1.uses multithreading

✔AMD Ryzen 5 1400

✔Intel Core i3-7100

processor cores into logical cores, also known as threads. Thus, each core can run two instruction streams at the same time.

2. Has AES

✖AMD Ryzen 5 1400

✔Intel Core i3-7100

AES is used to speed up encryption and decryption.

3. Has AVX

✖AMD Ryzen 5 1400

✔Intel Core i3-7100

AVX is used to help speed up calculations in multimedia, scientific and financial applications, and to improve the performance of the Linux RAID program.

4th SSE version

Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD Ryzen 5 1400)

SSE is used to speed up multimedia tasks such as editing images or adjusting audio volume. Each new version contains new instructions and improvements.

5.

Amd a series vs intel i3: Intel vs AMD: processors highlighted — Coolblue

What is AMD Equivalent to Intel Core i3?

So What is AMD Equivalent to Intel Core i3?

Brief Details on AMD Ryzen 3 CPU

1. Mobile/Laptop Based

2. Desktop-Based Ryzen 3 CPUs Without iGPU

3. Desktop-Based Ryzen 3 CPUs With iGPU

Comparison with Intel Core i3 Line Ups

Comparing Intel Core i3 and AMD Ryzen 3 Processors

Note on the Generation Parity

Intel 12th Generation Core i3 Processors

Intel Core i3 vs Ryzen 3 Benchmarks

Passmark

Cinebench R15 (Single Core)

Cinebench R15 (Multi Core)

Similarities Between Core i3 and Ryzen 3

Performance/Dollar Value

Final Words

AMD Ryzen 5 4100 vs Intel Core i3-12100F: Which $99 CPU?

Features and Specifications: Ryzen 3 4100 vs Core i3-12100F

Gaming Benchmarks and Performance: Ryzen 3 4100 vs Core i3-12100F

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware )

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware )

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware )

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware )

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware )

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware )

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware )

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware )

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware )

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware )

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware )

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware )

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware )

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware )

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware )

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware )

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware )

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware )

Application Performance: Ryzen 3 4100 vs Core i3-12100F

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

Overclocking: Ryzen 3 4100 vs Core i3-12100F

Power Consumption, Efficiency, and Cooling: Ryzen 3 4100 vs Core i3-12100F

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

(Image credit: Tom’s Hardware)

Pricing: Ryzen 3 4100 vs Core i3-12100F

More CPU Face-Offs

AMD Ryzen 3 Vs Intel Core i3: The Best Budget CPU?

Table Of Contents

Highlights of the Story

AMD Ryzen 3 vs Intel Core i3

AMD Ryzen 3 vs Intel Core i3: Specifications

AMD Ryzen 3 vs Intel Core i3: Architecture

AMD Ryzen 3 vs Intel Core i3: Performance

Featured Videos

Latest Reviews

Best Recharge Plans

You May Also Read

Our Picks

Recent News