Intel Core i3-10100 vs Intel Core i3-9100: What is the difference?
51points
Intel Core i3-10100
54points
Intel Core i3-9100
vs
64 facts in comparison
Intel Core i3-10100
Intel Core i3-9100
Why is Intel Core i3-10100 better than Intel Core i3-9100?
- 266MHz higher ram speed?
2666MHzvs2400MHz - 4 more CPU threads?
8vs4 - 33.56% higher PassMark result?
8974vs6719 - 4.1GB/s more memory bandwidth?
41.6GB/svs37.5GB/s - 64GB larger maximum memory amount?
128GBvs64GB - 23.47% higher multi-core Geekbench 5 result?
4109vs3328 - 12.0 more performance per watt?
63.2vs51.2
Why is Intel Core i3-9100 better than Intel Core i3-10100?
- Supports ECC memory?
Which are the most popular comparisons?
Intel Core i3-10100
vs
Intel Core i5-7400
Intel Core i3-9100
vs
Intel Core i3-9100F
Intel Core i3-10100
vs
Intel Core i3-10105
Intel Core i3-9100
vs
Intel Core i3-8100
Intel Core i3-10100
vs
Intel Core i3-10100F
Intel Core i3-9100
vs
Intel Core i5-6500
Intel Core i3-10100
vs
AMD Ryzen 3 3200G
Intel Core i3-9100
vs
Intel Core i5-8500
Intel Core i3-10100
vs
Intel Core i5-4570
Intel Core i3-9100
vs
Intel Core i5-7400
Intel Core i3-10100
vs
Intel Core i5-3470
Intel Core i3-9100
vs
AMD Ryzen 5 5600G
Intel Core i3-10100
vs
AMD Ryzen 3 4100
Intel Core i3-9100
vs
Intel Core i3-9100T
Intel Core i3-10100
vs
Intel Core i5-10400
Intel Core i3-9100
vs
Intel Celeron G4930
Intel Core i3-10100
vs
Intel Core i7-3770
Intel Core i3-9100
vs
Intel Core i7-9700
Intel Core i3-10100
vs
Intel Core i7-7700
Price comparison
Cheap alternatives
User reviews
Overall Rating
Intel Core i3-10100
5 User reviews
Intel Core i3-10100
9. 2/10
5 User reviews
Intel Core i3-9100
4 User reviews
Intel Core i3-9100
9.3/10
4 User reviews
Features
Value for money
9.4/10
5 votes
9.8/10
4 votes
Gaming
9.2/10
5 votes
9.0/10
4 votes
Performance
9.4/10
5 votes
9.0/10
4 votes
Reliability
9.2/10
5 votes
9.5/10
4 votes
Energy efficiency
9.2/10
5 votes
9.5/10
4 votes
Performance
1.CPU speed
4 x 3.6GHz
4 x 3.6GHz
The CPU speed indicates how many processing cycles per second can be executed by a CPU, considering all of its cores (processing units). It is calculated by adding the clock rates of each core or, in the case of multi-core processors employing different microarchitectures, of each group of cores.
2. CPU threads
More threads result in faster performance and better multitasking.
3.turbo clock speed
4.3GHz
4.2GHz
When the CPU is running below its limitations, it can boost to a higher clock speed in order to give increased performance.
4.Has an unlocked multiplier
✖Intel Core i3-10100
✖Intel Core i3-9100
Some processors come with an unlocked multiplier which makes them easy to overclock, allowing you to gain increased performance in games and other apps.
5.L2 cache
A larger L2 cache results in faster CPU and system-wide performance.
6.L3 cache
A larger L3 cache results in faster CPU and system-wide performance.
7.L1 cache
A larger L1 cache results in faster CPU and system-wide performance.
8.L2 core
0.25MB/core
0. 25MB/core
More data can be stored in the L2 cache for access by each core of the CPU.
9.L3 core
1.5MB/core
1.5MB/core
More data can be stored in the L3 cache for access by each core of the CPU.
Memory
1.RAM speed
2666MHz
2400MHz
It can support faster memory, which will give quicker system performance.
2.maximum memory bandwidth
41.6GB/s
37.5GB/s
This is the maximum rate that data can be read from or stored into memory.
3.DDR memory version
DDR (Double Data Rate) memory is the most common type of RAM. Newer versions of DDR memory support higher maximum speeds and are more energy-efficient.
4.memory channels
More memory channels increases the speed of data transfer between the memory and the CPU.
5. maximum memory amount
The maximum amount of memory (RAM) supported.
6.bus transfer rate
The bus is responsible for transferring data between different components of a computer or device.
7.Supports ECC memory
✖Intel Core i3-10100
✔Intel Core i3-9100
Error-correcting code memory can detect and correct data corruption. It is used when is it essential to avoid corruption, such as scientific computing or when running a server.
8.eMMC version
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i3-10100)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i3-9100)
A higher version of eMMC allows faster memory interfaces, having a positive effect on the performance of a device. For example, when transferring files from your computer to the internal storage over USB.
9.bus speed
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i3-10100)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i3-9100)
The bus is responsible for transferring data between different components of a computer or device.
Benchmarks
1.PassMark result
This benchmark measures the performance of the CPU using multiple threads.
2.PassMark result (single)
This benchmark measures the performance of the CPU using a single thread.
3.Geekbench 5 result (multi)
Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform benchmark that measures a processor’s multi-core performance. (Source: Primate Labs, 2022)
4.Cinebench R20 (multi) result
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i3-9100)
Cinebench R20 is a benchmark tool that measures a CPU’s multi-core performance by rendering a 3D scene.
5.Cinebench R20 (single) result
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i3-9100)
Cinebench R20 is a benchmark tool that measures a CPU’s single-core performance by rendering a 3D scene.
6.Geekbench 5 result (single)
Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform benchmark that measures a processor’s single-core performance. (Source: Primate Labs, 2022)
7.Blender (bmw27) result
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i3-10100)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i3-9100)
The Blender (bmw27) benchmark measures the performance of a processor by rendering a 3D scene. More powerful processors can render the scene in less time.
8.Blender (classroom) result
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i3-10100)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i3-9100)
The Blender (classroom) benchmark measures the performance of a processor by rendering a 3D scene. More powerful processors can render the scene in less time.
9.performance per watt
This means the CPU is more efficient, giving a greater amount of performance for each watt of power used.
Features
1.uses multithreading
✔Intel Core i3-10100
✔Intel Core i3-9100
Multithreading technology (such as Intel’s Hyperthreading or AMD’s Simultaneous Multithreading) provides increased performance by splitting each of the processor’s physical cores into virtual cores, also known as threads. This way, each core can run two instruction streams at once.
2.Has AES
✔Intel Core i3-10100
✔Intel Core i3-9100
AES is used to speed up encryption and decryption.
3.Has AVX
✔Intel Core i3-10100
✔Intel Core i3-9100
AVX is used to help speed up calculations in multimedia, scientific and financial apps, as well as improving Linux RAID software performance.
4.SSE version
SSE is used to speed up multimedia tasks such as editing an image or adjusting audio volume. Each new version contains new instructions and improvements.
5.Has F16C
✔Intel Core i3-10100
✔Intel Core i3-9100
F16C is used to speed up tasks such as adjusting the contrast of an image or adjusting volume.
6.bits executed at a time
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i3-10100)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i3-9100)
NEON provides acceleration for media processing, such as listening to MP3s.
7.Has MMX
✔Intel Core i3-10100
✔Intel Core i3-9100
MMX is used to speed up tasks such as adjusting the contrast of an image or adjusting volume.
8.Has TrustZone
✖Intel Core i3-10100
✖Intel Core i3-9100
A technology integrated into the processor to secure the device for use with features such as mobile payments and streaming video using digital rights management (DRM).
9.front-end width
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i3-10100)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (Intel Core i3-9100)
The CPU can decode more instructions per clock (IPC), meaning that the CPU performs better
Price comparison
Cancel
Which are the best CPUs?
Intel Core i3 9100 vs i3 10100: performance comparison
VS
Intel Core i3 9100
Intel Core i3 10100
We compared two 4-core desktop CPUs: the 3.6 GHz Intel Core i3 9100 against the 3.6 GHz i3 10100. On this page, you’ll find out which processor has better performance in benchmarks, games and other useful information.
- Review
- Differences
- Performance
- Specs
- Comments
Review
General overview and comparison of the processors
Single-Core Performance
Performance in single-threaded apps and benchmarks
Core i3 9100
58
Core i3 10100
60
Performance
Measure performance when all cores are involved
Core i3 9100
20
Core i3 10100
26
Power Efficiency
The efficiency score of electricity consumption
Core i3 9100
51
Core i3 10100
56
NanoReview Final Score
Generic CPU rating
Core i3 9100
41
Core i3 10100
45
Key Differences
What are the key differences between 10100 and 9100
Advantages of Intel Core i3 10100
- Supports up to 128 GB DDR4-2666 RAM
- Newer — released 1-year and 1-month later
- Around 4. 1 GB/s (11%) higher theoretical memory bandwidth
- 2% higher Turbo Boost frequency (4.3 GHz vs 4.2 GHz)
Benchmarks
Comparing the performance of CPUs in benchmarks
Cinebench R23 (Single-Core)
Core i3 9100
1065
Core i3 10100
+8%
1146
Cinebench R23 (Multi-Core)
Core i3 9100
3718
Core i3 10100
+52%
5640
Passmark CPU (Single-Core)
Core i3 9100
2545
Core i3 10100
+4%
2659
Passmark CPU (Multi-Core)
Core i3 9100
6679
Core i3 10100
+33%
8850
Geekbench 5 (Single-Core)
Core i3 9100
+1%
1065
Core i3 10100
1054
Geekbench 5 (Multi-Core)
Core i3 9100
3477
Core i3 10100
+23%
4270
▶️ Submit your Cinebench R23 result
By purchasing through links on this site, we may receive a commission from Amazon. This does not affect our assessment methodology.
Specifications
Full technical specification of Intel Core i3 9100 and i3 10100
General
Vendor | Intel | Intel |
Released | April 23, 2019 | May 1, 2020 |
Type | Desktop | Desktop |
instruction set | x86-64 | x86-64 |
Codename | Coffee Lake | Comet Lake-S |
Model number | i3-9100 | i3-10100 |
Socket | LGA-1151 | LGA-1200 |
Integrated GPU | UHD Graphics 630 | UHD Graphics 630 |
Performance
Cores | 4 | 4 |
Threads | 4 | 8 |
Base Frequency | 3. 6 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
Turbo Boost Frequency | 4.2 GHz | 4.3 GHz |
Bus frequency | 100 MHz | 100 MHz |
Multiplier | 37x | 36x |
Bus Bandwidth | 8 GT/s | 8 GT/s |
L1 Cache | 64K (per core) | 64K (per core) |
L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 256K (per core) |
L3 Cache | 6MB (shared) | 6MB (shared) |
Unlocked Multiplier | No | No |
Fabrication process | 14 nm | 14 nm |
TDP | 65 W | 65 W |
Max. temperature | 100°C | 100°C |
Integrated Graphics | Intel UHD Graphics 630 | Intel UHD Graphics 630 |
GPU Base Clock | 350 MHz | 350 MHz |
GPU Boost Clock | 1100 MHz | 1100 MHz |
Shading Units | 192 | 192 |
TMUs | 24 | 24 |
ROPs | 3 | 3 |
Execution Units | 24 | 24 |
TGP | 15 W | 15 W |
Max. Resolution | 4096×2304 — 60 Hz | 4096×2304 — 60 Hz |
iGPU FLOPS
Core i3 9100
0.38 TFLOPS
Core i3 10100
0.38 TFLOPS
Memory support
Memory types | DDR4-2400 | DDR4-2666 |
Memory Size | 64 GB | 128 GB |
Max. Memory Channels | 2 | 2 |
Max. Memory Bandwidth | 37.5 GB/s | 41.6 GB/s |
ECC Support | Yes | No |
Official site | Intel Core i3 9100 official page | Intel Core i3 10100 official page |
PCI Express Version | 3.0 | 3.0 |
PCI Express Lanes | 16 | 16 |
Extended instructions | SSE4. 1, SSE4.2, AVX-2 | — |
Cast your vote
Choose between two processors
Core i3 9100
15 (22.1%)
Core i3 10100
53 (77.9%)
Total votes: 68
ompetitors
1.
Core i3 10100 or Ryzen 3 3200G
2.
Core i3 10100 or Core i5 10400
3.
Core i3 10100 or Ryzen 5 4600G
4.
Core i3 10100 or Core i3 12100
5.
Core i3 10100 or Ryzen 5 Pro 4650G
6.
Core i3 10100 or Ryzen 3 Pro 4350G
7.
Core i3 10100 or Core i3 10100F
Intel Core i3-10100 vs Intel Core i3-9100
|
|
|
Intel Core i3-10100 vs Intel Core i3-9100
Comparison of the technical characteristics between the processors, with the Intel Core i3-10100 on one side and the Intel Core i3-9100 on the other side. The first is dedicated to the desktop sector, It has 4 cores, 8 threads, a maximum frequency of 4,3GHz. The second is used on the desktop segment, it has a total of 4 cores, 4 threads, its turbo frequency is set to 4,2 GHz. The following table also compares the lithography, the number of transistors (if indicated), the amount of cache memory, the maximum RAM memory capacity, the type of memory accepted, the release date, the maximum number of PCIe lanes, the values obtained in Geekbench 4 and Cinebench R15.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.
This page contains references to products from one or more of our advertisers. We may receive compensation when you click on links to those products. For an explanation of our advertising policy, please visit this page.
Specifications:
Processor | Intel Core i3-10100 | Intel Core i3-9100 | ||||||
Market (main) | Desktop | Desktop | ||||||
ISA | x86-64 (64 bit) | x86-64 (64 bit) | ||||||
Microarchitecture | Comet Lake | Coffee Lake | ||||||
Core name | Comet Lake-S | Coffee Lake-S | ||||||
Family | Core i3-10000 | Core i3-9000 | ||||||
Part number(s), S-Spec | BX8070110100, BXC8070110100, CM8070104291317, QTP6, SRh4N |
BX80684I39100, BX80684I39100, CM8068403377319 SR3XQ |
||||||
Release date | Q2 2020 | Q2 2019 | ||||||
Lithography | 14 nm+++ | 14 nm++ | ||||||
Cores | 4 | 4 | ||||||
Threads | 8 | 4 | ||||||
Base frequency | 3,6 GHz | 3,6 GHz | ||||||
Turbo frequency | 4,3 GHz | 4,2 GHz | ||||||
Bus speed | 8 GT/s | 8 GT/s | ||||||
Cache memory | 6 MB | 6 MB | ||||||
Max memory capacity | 128 GB | 64 GB | ||||||
Memory types | DDR4-2666 | DDR4-2400 | ||||||
Max # of memory channels | 2 | 2 | ||||||
Max memory bandwidth | 41,6 GB/s | 37,5 GB/s | ||||||
Max PCIe lanes | 16 | 16 | ||||||
TDP | 65 W | 65 W | ||||||
Suggested PSU | 600W ATX Power Supply | 600W ATX Power Supply | ||||||
GPU integrated graphics | Intel UHD Graphics 630 (Comet Lake) | Intel UHD Graphics 630 (Coffee Lake) | ||||||
GPU execution units | 24 | 23 | ||||||
GPU shading units | 192 | 184 | ||||||
GPU base clock | 350 MHz | 350 MHz | ||||||
GPU boost clock | 1100 MHz | 1100 MHz | ||||||
GPU FP32 floating point | 460,8 GFLOPS | 423,2 GFLOPS | ||||||
Socket | LGA1200 | LGA1151 | ||||||
Compatible motherboard | Socket LGA 1200 Motherboard | Socket LGA 1151 Motherboard | ||||||
Maximum temperature | 100°C | 100°C | ||||||
CPU-Z single thread | 468 | 375 | ||||||
CPU-Z multi thread | 2. 449 | 1.551 | ||||||
Cinebench R15 single thread | 184 | 181 | ||||||
Cinebench R15 multi-thread | 905 | 668 | ||||||
Cinebench R20 single thread | 440 | 456 | ||||||
Cinebench R20 multi-thread | 2.181 | 1.688 | ||||||
Cinebench R23 single thread | 1.114 | 1.109 | ||||||
Cinebench R23 multi-thread | 5.269 | 4.098 | ||||||
PassMark single thread | 2.638 | 2.497 | ||||||
PassMark CPU Mark | 8. 934 | 6.874 | ||||||
(Windows 64-bit) Geekbench 4 single core |
5.101 | 4.785 | ||||||
(Windows 64-bit) Geekbench 4 multi-core |
16.447 | 13.388 | ||||||
(Windows) Geekbench 5 single core |
1.105 | 1.053 | ||||||
(Windows) Geekbench 5 multi-core |
4.164 | 3.166 | ||||||
(SGEMM) GFLOPS performance |
342,9 GFLOPS | 201,8 GFLOPS | ||||||
(Multi-core / watt performance) Performance / watt ratio |
253 pts / W | 206 pts / W | ||||||
Amazon | ||||||||
eBay |
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.
We can better compare what are the technical differences between the two processors.
Suggested PSU: We assume that we have An ATX computer case, a high end graphics card, 16GB RAM, a 512GB SSD, a 1TB HDD hard drive, a Blu-Ray drive. We will have to rely on a more powerful power supply if we want to have several graphics cards, several monitors, more memory, etc.
Price: For technical reasons, we cannot currently display a price less than 24 hours, or a real-time price. This is why we prefer for the moment not to show a price. You should refer to the respective online stores for the latest price, as well as availability.
We see that the two processors have an equivalent number of cores, the maximum frequency of Intel Core i3-10100 is greater, that their respective TDP are of the same order. The Intel Core i3-10100 was designed earlier.
Performances :
Performance comparison between the two processors, for this we consider the results generated on benchmark software such as Geekbench 4.
CPU-Z — Multi-thread & single thread score | |
---|---|
Intel Core i3-10100 |
468 2.449 |
Intel Core i3-9100 |
375 1.551 |
In single core, the difference is 25%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 58%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
CPU-Z is a system information software that provides the name of the processor, its model number, the codename, the cache levels, the package, the process. It can also gives data about the mainboard, the memory. It makes real time measurement, with finally a benchmark for the single thread, as well as for the multi thread.
Cinebench R15 — Multi-thread & single thread score | |
---|---|
Intel Core i3-10100 |
184 905 |
Intel Core i3-9100 |
181 668 |
In single core, the difference is 2%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 35%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Cinebench R15 evaluates the performance of CPU calculations by restoring a photorealistic 3D scene. The scene has 2,000 objects, 300,000 polygons, uses sharp and fuzzy reflections, bright areas, shadows, procedural shaders, antialiasing, and so on. The faster the rendering of the scene is created, the more powerful the PC is, with a high number of points.
Cinebench R20 — Multi-thread & single thread score | |
---|---|
Intel Core i3-10100 |
440 2.181 |
Intel Core i3-9100 |
456 1.688 |
In single core, the difference is -4%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 29%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Cinebench R20 is a multi-platform test software which allows to evaluate the hardware capacities of a device such as a computer, a tablet, a server. This version of Cinebench takes into account recent developments in processors with multiple cores and the latest improvements in rendering techniques. The evaluation is ultimately even more relevant.
Cinebench R23 — Multi-thread & single thread score | |
---|---|
Intel Core i3-10100 |
1.114 5.269 |
Intel Core i3-9100 |
1.109 4.098 |
In single core, the difference is 0%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 29%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Cinebench R23 is cross-platform testing software that allows you to assess the hardware capabilities of a device such as a computer, tablet, server. This version of Cinebench takes into account recent developments in processors with multiple cores and the latest improvements in rendering techniques. The evaluation is ultimately even more relevant. The test scene contains no less than 2,000 objects and more than 300,000 polygons in total.
PassMark — CPU Mark & single thread | |
---|---|
Intel Core i3-10100 |
2.638 8.934 |
Intel Core i3-9100 |
2.497 6. 874 |
In single core, the difference is 6%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 30%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
PassMark is a benchmarking software that performs several performance tests including prime numbers, integers, floating point, compression, physics, extended instructions, encoding, sorting. The higher the score is, the higher is the device capacity.
On Windows 64-bit:
Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Windows 64-bit | |
---|---|
Intel Core i3-10100 |
5.101 16.447 |
Intel Core i3-9100 |
4.785 13.388 |
In single core, the difference is 7%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 23%.
On Linux 64-bit:
Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Linux 64-bit | |
---|---|
Intel Core i3-9100 |
5.214 15.114 |
Intel Core i3-10100 |
4.771 14.186 |
In single core, the difference is 9%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 7%.
On Mac OS X 64-bit:
Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Mac OS X 64-bit | |
---|---|
Intel Core i3-10100 |
5.428 18.097 |
Intel Core i3-9100 |
5.098 14.836 |
In single core, the difference is 6%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 22%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Geekbench 4 is a complete benchmark platform with several types of tests, including data compression, images, AES encryption, SQL encoding, HTML, PDF file rendering, matrix computation, Fast Fourier Transform, 3D object simulation, photo editing, memory testing. This allows us to better visualize the respective power of these devices. For each result, we took an average of 250 values on the famous benchmark software.
On Windows:
Geekbench 5 — Multi-core & single core score — Windows | |
---|---|
Intel Core i3-10100 |
1.105 4.164 |
Intel Core i3-9100 |
1.053 3.166 |
In single core, the difference is 5%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 32%.
On Linux:
Geekbench 5 — Multi-core & single core score — Linux | |
---|---|
Intel Core i3-10100 |
1.171 4.181 |
Intel Core i3-9100 |
1.198 3.747 |
In single core, the difference is -2%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 12%.
On macOS:
Geekbench 5 — Multi-core & single core score — macOS | |
---|---|
Intel Core i3-10100 |
1.050 4.207 |
Intel Core i3-9100 |
1.020 3.379 |
In single core, the difference is 3%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 25%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Geekbench 5 is a software for measuring the performance of a computer system, for fixed devices, mobile devices, servers. This platform makes it possible to better compare the power of the CPU, the computing power and to compare it with similar or totally different systems. Geekbench 5 includes new workloads that represent work tasks and applications that we can find in reality.
Equivalence:
Intel Core i3-10100 AMD equivalentIntel Core i3-9100 AMD equivalent
See also:
Intel Core i3-10100FIntel Core i3-10100TIntel Core i3-10100YIntel Core i3-10105Intel Core i3-10105FIntel Core i3-10105T
Intel Core i3-9100FIntel Core i3-9100T
Intel i3-10100 vs 9100 vs 8100 — Does Hyperthreading Matter?
Intel recently launched the i3-10100 processor, which has added hyperthreading to the i3, but just how much of a performance boost does this give us over the older i3-9100 and i3-8100 CPUs in games and applications? Let’s find out and see how they compare.
All three processors have 4 cores, however only the newest 10th gen 10100 has hyperthreading, the older 8100 and 9100 do not.All three have the same amount of cache and same base clock speed, however the maximum turbo speed increases with each generation. I’m comparing these processors because I think it will be interesting to see how the i3 has changed over time, and also to look at the difference hyperthreading will make.
In terms of price differences, the 10100 seems to go for $140 USD, $75 USD for the 9100F, while the 8100 appears to be more expensive, probably as it’s older and harder to find. There is also the F version of the 8100, but that’s not what I have here, so you could probably save some money if you don’t need the integrated graphics.
All processors were tested in the same system, however I’ve had to change motherboards as the 10th gen uses the new LGA1200 socket.For the 8100 and 9100 I’ve used the MSI Z390 ACE, and for the 10100 I’ve used the MSI Z490 ACE. While none of these processors can be overclocked, using these more expensive motherboards does allow for faster memory.
The rest of the components were otherwise the same, I’ve tested with 16gb of DDR4-3200 memory running in dual channel at CL14 and with an Nvidia RTX 2080 Ti to reduce bottlenecks. Obviously this is not typical hardware you’d match with an i3, the goal of this comparison is not to show you what you’d expect with more real world hardware, but to instead to compare the processors. It probably would have made more sense to test with slower memory, but I had this data for other comparisons and didn’t want to test all three processors twice.
Although all chips came with a stock cooler, I’ve done all testing with my Fractal S36 AIO with Noctua NT-h2 thermal paste.Testing was completed with the latest version of Windows and Nvidia drivers along with all BIOS updates available installed. With that in mind we’ll first check out the differences in various applications, as well as power draw and thermals, followed by gaming tests at 1080p and 1440p resolutions afterwards.
Starting with Cinebench R20, I’ve got the Intel i3-10100 processor at the top of the graph, the next level 9100F below in the middle, then the older 8100 down the bottom. Straight away we can see the 10th gen i3 has the largest boost in multicore performance owing to the fact that it has hyperthreading unlike the rest. This puts it 36% faster than the 9100 and 54% faster than the 8100.I’ve also tested the older Cinebench R15 as a lot of people still use it, and the margins were quite similar to what we just saw with the newer R20.Blender was tested with the Opendata BMW and Classroom benchmarks. The 10100 was able to complete this task around 60% faster than the 8th gen 8100, or 44% faster when compared to the 9th gen 9100, so some nice gains there due to this being another highly threaded workload.Handbrake was used to convert one of my 4K laptop review videos to 1080p with the HQ 1080p30 preset, and as another program that leverages additional threads, the i3-10100 was the fastest out of these options, coming out 28% faster than the 9th gen i3, and 42% faster than the 8th gen i3. Adobe Premiere was used to export one of my laptop review videos at 4K, and I’ve used VBR 2 pass so all were running for over an hour. Again the 10100 was completing the task fastest as expected, putting it 26% faster than the 9100F, or 40% faster when compared with the 8100.Premiere was also tested using the Puget systems benchmark tool, and this test factors in more than just export times such as live playback. The 10100 was doing much better in these combined Premiere tests now, scoring 42% faster than the 9100F, and a massive 63% faster than the 8100, so if you’re a video editor the 10th gen option does offer some nice improvements.I’ve used the Puget Systems Photoshop benchmark, and while there are modest improvements with the newer chips, the difference is less pronounced compared to other multicore heavy workloads. The 10100 was scoring 11% ahead of the 9100F, and 21% ahead of the 8100, which while sounding good, is one of the lower results out of all applications tested.7-Zip was used to test compression and decompression speeds, and the extra threads with the 10100 appear to be offering a significant boost over the other options. AES encryption and decryption was tested using VeraCrypt, and this workload saw the largest improvement with the 10100 out of all applications tested, with the 10100 more than 80% faster than the 8100.The V-Ray benchmark uses the CPU to render out a scene, and as another multicore test, the 10100 was scoring much higher over the other two i3 processors. It was scoring 38% faster than the 9100F, and 48% faster than the 8100.The Corona benchmark also uses the processor to render out a scene, and as another threaded workload the 10100 was doing much better than the others, completing the task 58% faster than the 9100F, and 75% faster compared to the 8100.I’ve used the Hardware Unboxed Microsoft Excel test, and the i3-10100 was once more completing the task the fastest, almost 50% faster over the 9100, and nearly 60% faster than the 8100.GeekBench 5 was seeing one of the lower differences in the multicore score when compared to the other threaded workloads, though the 10100 still has a 20 to 30% lead over the others in multicore score, and while the single core scores are higher too, this was the lowest improvement seen to single core performance out of all apps tested.
These are the differences between the Intel i3-10100 against the i3-9100F from last generation.As we can see, results can really vary based on the specific workload, however the 10100 was ahead in all cases, which makes sense given it’s got double the thread count and a 100Mhz higher turbo boost speed.
Here’s how the 10100 compares against the older 8100F from the 8th generationas the 8100 is clocked a fair bit lower without turbo boost speeds, the differences are much larger compared to what we just saw with the 9100.
Here’s how much faster the 9100F is in these same tests over the 8100I’ve left the X Axis scale the same to the last two graphs shown as this really shows how much more of an improvement the 10100 is offering.When we look at the total system power draw from the wall in the blender test, the 8100 was using the least amount of power as you’d expect, however I found it very interesting that the 10100 was using less compared to the 9100F.The 10th gen option must be a fair bit more efficient, because while using less power it’s completing this task around 44% faster than the 9100F. As the 10100 is using less power than the 9100F, it’s not too surprising to see it also running a little cooler as well, though the 8100F was cooler still, granted these temps under heavy blender load are no issues at all with my way overkill AIO, I suspect they’d be fine with their stock coolers too.
These are the clock speeds that were reached over all cores.All three of these options had no issues running at their maximum all core speeds.
Let’s get into the gaming results next, I’ve tested 15 games at both 1080p and 1440p resolutions. As a reminder I’m using the RTX 2080 Ti to reduce GPU bottlenecks, the goal of these numbers is not to show you what sort of frame rates to expect from these processors with more reasonable GPUs, it’s to compare the processors against each other in an unconstrained manner.Battlefield V was tested running through the same section of the game in campaign mode. I’ve got the 1080p results down the bottom, the 1440p results above. At 1080p there wasn’t too much of a boost in average FPS, while the 1% low was about the same on the 9th and 10th gen chips. At 1440p the averages are much closer together, though the 1% low continued improving the newer the processor.Assassin’s Creed Odyssey was tested with the games benchmark tool, and as a test that I’ve noted to be fairly CPU dependent in the past, the 10100 was seeing massive gains. At 1080p even its 1% low was above the average frame rate from the 9100F. The 10100 was 36% faster in average FPS over the 9100F at 1080p and 1440p, then a larger 51% faster than the 8100 at 1080p and 45% faster at 1440p.Call of Duty modern warfare was tested in campaign mode, and at 1080p the results were a little inconsistent as seen by the 9100F coming in a little behind the 8100. This was also noted in the 1% low performance at 1440p, however this time the average FPS was ahead of the 8100, but either way there are no major differences in this game between these three i3 processors.Borderlands 3 was tested using the games built in benchmark. Again not too much of a difference in terms of average FPS, though the 1% lows were a little odd with the 9100F seemingly doing better there at 1440p but then about the same as the 8100 at 1080p. Control was tested by performing the same test pass through the game on all three test systems. At 1080p the average frame rate was very close regardless of processor used, however the 1% low was improving more as we step up through from oldest to newest.Red Dead Redemption 2 was tested using the games benchmark tool, and this test saw big gains from the 10th gen processor. At 1080p the 10100 was 49% faster than the 8100 and 33% faster than the 9100F, then at 1440p the 10100 was 36% faster than the 8100 and 22% faster than the 9100F, so less of a difference at the higher resolution as the processor typically matters less there.Shadow of the Tomb Raider was also tested with the games benchmark tool, and there were also some fair improvements seen with the newer processors. At 1080p the 10100 was 18% faster than the 9100F just below it, but 29.5% faster when compared to the oldest 8100.
Rainbow Six Siege was tested using the built in benchmark with Vulkan. There was minimal difference to the averages at 1440p, though a bit more of a difference seen in the 1% lows. At 1080p where the processor often matters more though, the 10100 was 17% faster than the 8th gen 8100, and 11.5% faster than the 9th gen 9100F.Fortnite was tested using the replay feature with the exact same replay file run on all three processors. At 1440p the average FPS was similar, however there were nice gains to 1% low performance as we move up the stack to the newer options. At 1080p the averages were a little more different, but again the big difference was in the 1% low, where the 10100 was 45% faster than the 9100F in that regard.CS:GO was tested using the Ulletical FPS benchmark, and as a game that’s typically sensitive to processor performance, the 10100 was doing best as expected.Overwatch was tested in the practice range, and while this runs better than actual gameplay, it more easily allows me to perform the exact same test run, which is ideal for a comparison like this. At 1080p we’re basically hitting the 300 FPS frame cap with the 10th gen i3, however there’s a much larger 20% improvement seen in the 1% low. The Division 2 was tested using the games benchmark tool, and with the 1080p resolution the 10100 had the biggest improvement out of all 15 games tested. At 1080p it was 61% faster than the 8100, and 49% faster than the 9100F, so some big gains that must be down to hyperthreading.The Witcher 3 was tested running through the same section of the game, and as a game that tends to be more GPU heavy, especially at this setting level, there wasn’t too big of a difference between the processors, though it was strange that the 10th gen had consistently lower 1% lows at 1080p, but was then back on top at 1440p.Ghost Recon Breakpoint was tested with the games built in benchmark, and this was another title where the 1% low performance with the 10100 had a significant improvement when compared to the other processors, presumably due to the extra thread count. Far Cry New Dawn was also tested with the games built in benchmark, and although the improvements were less compared to some of the others, there were still consistent gains as we move up through 8th to 10th gen. On average out of these 15 games tested, the Intel i3-10100 was 14% faster at 1080p in average FPS when compared against the older i3-9100F processor. Some games like Control saw basically no difference, while others like the division 2 were almost reaching 50% higher frame rates.When we step up to the 1440p resolution though, the difference lowers to a 7% lead with the 10th gen processor, as the CPU typically matters less at higher resolutions like this.When we compare the 10100 against the older 8th gen i3-8100 at 1080p, there’s a much larger 21% boost to average FPS, but again results can really vary by specific game. Once more control saw basically no difference, while again the Division 2 had a massive 61% improvement.
At 1440p once more the difference is less pronounced, however the 10th gen chip was still able to achieve a fairly decent 12% higher average frame rate on average.There’s much less of a difference when we look at how the 9100F compares with the 8100. At 1080p the 9100F was less than 6% faster, while this lowers to around 4% at 1440pwhich I think really helps illustrate how much extra performance is on offer from the addition of hyperthreading. Yeah the extra clockspeed would be helping a bit too, but it’s nice to have this here.
When we take the costs into consideration, the 10th gen 10100 doesn’t appear to be great value at the moment. It’s going for around $140 USD on Newegg and I can’t see it at that many other stores, presumably due to low supply as is the case with many other 10th gen processors at the moment. This puts it almost twice as expensive as the 9100F, and while there’s an argument for the performance boost in productivity workloads, it’s difficult to justify when it comes to gaming given the 10100 was 14% faster than the 9100F on average.
Honestly based on what we saw in my 3300X vs 10100 review previously, the 3300X seems like much better value as it’s cheaper, offers a similar experience in many games, but comes out even further ahead in productivity workloads. It would seem that Intel were forced to introduce hyperthreading to the i3 lineup by AMD, as the Ryzen 3 3100 and 3300X both offer 4 cores and 8 threads for less to similar price points. Regardless of which you pick, we as consumers are winning here by having more options available which is good to see.
Based on all of this information, let me know which i3 you’d pick and why down in the comments, assuming of course you’re planning on going for an i3! Don’t forget that if you already have a 8100 or 9100 you need to upgrade the motherboard to use 10th gen.
In case you have found a mistake in the text, please send a message to the author by selecting the mistake and pressing Ctrl-Enter.
Intel Core i3-9100 vs Intel Core i3-10100 Comparison
VS
Intel Core i3-9100
Buy on Amazon
Intel Core i3-10100
Buy on Amazon
- Key Differences
- Performance
- Features
- Miscellaneous
- General info
- Memory
- Benchmarks
Intel Core i3-9100
Intel Core i3-10100
Cores | 4 | 4 |
CPU Threads | 4 | 8 |
Base Clock Speed | 3. 6GHz | 3.6GHz |
Turbo Clock Speed | 4.2GHz | 4.3GHz |
TDP (THERMAL DESIGN POINT) | 65W | 65W |
Has integrated graphics | Yes | Yes |
Performance per watt | 51. 2 | 63.2 |
CPU Speed & Cores | 4 x 3.6GHz | 4 x 3. 6GHz |
Number of CPU Threads | 4 | 8 |
L2 Cache Size | 1MB | 1MB |
L3 Cache Size | 6MB | 6MB |
Turbo Boost Frequency | 4. 2GHz | 4.3GHz |
L1 Cache Size | 256KB | 256KB |
L2 Core | 0. 25MB/core | 0.25MB/core |
L3 Core | 1. 5MB/core | 1.5MB/core |
Clock Multiplier | 31 | Not Known |
Turbo Boost Tech Version | 2 | 2 |
Does it have an unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Uses ARM big. LITTLE tech | No | No |
Uses ARM HMP | No | No |
Has AES Support | Yes | Yes |
Supports CPU Throttling | Yes | Yes |
Supported SSE Version | 4. 2 | 4.2 |
Has AVX Support | Yes | Yes |
Has MMX Tech Support | Yes | Yes |
Has F16C Support | Yes | Yes |
Has FMA4 Instructions Support | No | No |
Has Multithreading Tech Support | Yes | Yes |
Has NX Processor Bit Support | Yes | Yes |
Has FMA3 Instructions Support | Yes | Yes |
Supports ARM TrustZone Tech | No | No |
Height | 37. 5mm | 37.5mm |
Width Size | 37. 5mm | 37.5mm |
RAM Memory Speed | 2400MHz | 2666MHz |
Max Memory Bandwidth | 37. 5GB/s | 41.6GB/s |
Max Memory Channels | 2 | 2 |
Supported Memory Size | 64GB | 128GB |
Bus Bandwidth | 8GT/s | 8GT/s |
ECC (Error-Correcting Code) Memory Support | Yes | No |
DDR Type Memory Version | 4 | 4 |
PassMark Score | 6719 | 8974 |
PassMark Score (Single Thread) | 2546 | 2649 |
Geekbench 5 Score (Multi-Thread) | 3328 | 4109 |
Geekbench 5 Score (Single Thread) | 1069 | 1109 |
PassMark Score (Overclocked) | Not Known | 8991 |
CPU Performance (Per Watt) | 51. 2 | 63.2 |
Similar Comparisons
How Does Intel’s 10100 Compare With Their 9100?
Compare Intel’s Core i3-10100 with their Core i3-9100. Which CPU is better for gaming, general apps, and professional tools?
Core i3 10100
Intel Core i3-10100
Check Price on Amazon
Amazon Affiliate Link
Core i3 9100
Intel Core i3-9100
Check Price on Amazon
Amazon Affiliate Link
This article compares Intel’s Core i3-10100 with their Core i3-9100, exploring which CPU is better for:
- Gaming — the latest graphics-intense games
- General Apps — web browsing, streaming, and office applications
- Professional Tools — 2D and 3D graphics tools, video editors, compilers, and engineering tools
Gaming on the Core i3-10100 vs.
Core i3-9100
Ella Don / Unsplash
Core i3-10100
When using Intel’s Core i3 10100 CPU for gaming, you can expect mediocre game performance with a high-performance CPU cooler or poor game performance with a basic or stock CPU cooler.
Core i3-9100
When using Intel’s Core i3 9100 CPU for gaming, you can expect poor game performance with either a high-performance CPU cooler or a stock CPU cooler.
Core i3 10100
Intel Core i3-10100
Check Price on Amazon
Amazon Affiliate Link
Core i3 9100
Intel Core i3-9100
Check Price on Amazon
Amazon Affiliate Link
Gaming Considerations
While a good GPU is critical for gaming performance, your CPU will also have a significant impact. If the CPU is too slow, it can be a bottleneck for your GPU, which can reduce your framerate or cause stuttering. The most important CPU capabilities for gaming are single-core max turbo boost frequency and the number of cores. A high base frequency is also critical for inadequately cooled CPUs.
Depending on the game, the CPU will often handle tasks including scene management, gameplay logic, physics calculations, and asset loading.
Having multiple CPU cores can improve performance with games that utilize them. However, developers cannot split up every task to take advantage of a growing number of cores. Most modern games don’t benefit from having more than 6–8 cores. Game performance will experience diminishing returns as you add more CPU cores.
Cores
10100:
The 10100’s 4 cores allow for mediocre performance with the latest graphics-intense games.
9100:
The 9100’s 4 cores allow for mediocre performance with the latest graphics-intense games.
Learn more about Core Counts below.
Base Frequency
10100:
The 10100’s 3.60 GHz base frequency is good for performance with the latest graphics-intense games, when not boosting. You can reach these base frequencies even without a high-end cooler.
9100:
The 9100’s 3.60 GHz base frequency is good for performance with the latest graphics-intense games, when not boosting. You can reach these base frequencies even without a high-end cooler.
Learn more about CPU Clock Speeds below.
Single-Core Turbo
10100:
With a high-end cooler, the 10100’s 4.30 GHz single-core max turbo boost frequency is excellent for performance with the latest graphics-intense games. You can maintain these frequencies with a high-end cooler.
9100:
With a high-end cooler, the 9100’s 4.20 GHz single-core max turbo boost frequency is excellent for performance with the latest graphics-intense games. You can maintain these frequencies with a high-end cooler.
Learn more about CPU Clock Speeds below.
P-Core Turbo
10100:
The 10100 does not have Performance cores.
9100:
The 9100 does not have Performance cores.
Learn more about CPU Clock Speeds below.
Overclocking Support
10100:
The 10100 CPU’s lack of support for overclocking cannot benefit performance with the latest graphics-intense games.
9100:
The 9100 CPU’s lack of support for overclocking cannot benefit performance with the latest graphics-intense games.
Learn more about Overclocking below.
DDR Support
10100:
The 10100 CPU’s support for DDR4 with a max stock speed of 2666 MHz can be mediocre for performance with the latest graphics-intense games.
9100:
The 9100 CPU’s support for DDR4 with a max stock speed of 2400 MHz can be poor for performance with the latest graphics-intense games.
Learn more about DDR Support below.
PCIe
10100:
The 10100 CPU’s support for PCIe 3.0 can be poor for performance with the latest graphics-intense games, as it will limit the potential of the latest SSDs and graphics cards.
9100:
The 9100 CPU’s support for PCIe 3.0 can be poor for performance with the latest graphics-intense games, as it will limit the potential of the latest SSDs and graphics cards.
L3 Cache
10100:
The 10100’s lackluster 6 MB of L3 cache is poor for performance with the latest graphics-intense games.
9100:
The 9100’s lackluster 6 MB of L3 cache is poor for performance with the latest graphics-intense games.
Learn more about Cache Sizes below.
General Apps on the Core i3-10100 vs. Core i3-9100
Core i3-10100
When using Intel’s Core i3 10100 CPU for general apps, you can expect good app performance with either a high-performance CPU cooler or a stock CPU cooler.
Core i3-9100
When using Intel’s Core i3 9100 CPU for general apps, you can expect good app performance with either a high-performance CPU cooler or a stock CPU cooler.
Core i3 10100
Intel Core i3-10100
Check Price on Amazon
Amazon Affiliate Link
Core i3 9100
Intel Core i3-9100
Check Price on Amazon
Amazon Affiliate Link
General App Considerations
If you’re only planning to stream shows, use office apps, or browse the internet, you won’t need a top-end CPU to get good performance. The most important CPU capability for general app usage is the single-core max turbo boost frequency. A high base frequency is also helpful for inadequately cooled CPUs.
Browsers depend on your CPU to quickly load pages and video content and manage multiple browser tabs. Higher single-core turbo boost frequencies can speed up page load times.
Office and web applications are typically single-threaded, so running a single application won’t take advantage of a many-core CPU.
The more cores a CPU has, the more applications you can run simultaneously without noticing a performance impact.
Office and web applications rarely max out the CPU for long periods. These applications can use turbo boost speeds when a burst of processing power is needed, returning to the more efficient base frequencies afterward.
Cores
10100:
The 10100’s 4 cores allow for excellent performance with modern apps.
9100:
The 9100’s 4 cores allow for excellent performance with modern apps.
Learn more about Core Counts below.
Single-Core Turbo
10100:
With a high-end cooler, the 10100’s 4.30 GHz single-core max turbo boost frequency is excellent for performance with modern apps. You can maintain these frequencies with a high-end cooler.
9100:
With a high-end cooler, the 9100’s 4.20 GHz single-core max turbo boost frequency is excellent for performance with modern apps. You can maintain these frequencies with a high-end cooler.
Learn more about CPU Clock Speeds below.
P-Core Turbo
10100:
The 10100 does not have Performance cores.
9100:
The 9100 does not have Performance cores.
Learn more about CPU Clock Speeds below.
DDR Support
10100:
The 10100 CPU’s support for DDR4 with a max stock speed of 2666 MHz can be mediocre for performance with modern apps.
9100:
The 9100 CPU’s support for DDR4 with a max stock speed of 2400 MHz can be poor for performance with modern apps.
Learn more about DDR Support below.
Professional Tools on the Core i3-10100 vs.
Core i3-9100
Core i3-10100
When using Intel’s Core i3 10100 CPU for professional tools, you can expect mediocre tool performance with a high-performance CPU cooler or poor tool performance with a basic or stock CPU cooler.
Core i3-9100
When using Intel’s Core i3 9100 CPU for professional tools, you can expect poor tool performance with either a high-performance CPU cooler or a stock CPU cooler.
Core i3 10100
Intel Core i3-10100
Check Price on Amazon
Amazon Affiliate Link
Core i3 9100
Intel Core i3-9100
Check Price on Amazon
Amazon Affiliate Link
Professional Tool Considerations
Video editors, 2D and 3D graphics tools, software compilers, and engineering tools require high-performing CPUs.
Professional tools are often well optimized to use many cores. CPU cores allow tools to parallelize processing tasks. Increasing the number of cores can divide the time required to process a task if the tool has good multi-threading support.
To maximize performance with professional tools, you’ll want to use a CPU with a high turbo boost frequency and many CPU cores. Good heat dissipation is needed to maintain turbo boost frequencies for extended periods.
While graphics applications use your GPU for some rendering tasks, most calculations and data operations are still dependent on your CPU.
Cores
10100:
The 10100’s 4 cores allow for mediocre performance with professional tools.
9100:
The 9100’s 4 cores allow for mediocre performance with professional tools.
Learn more about Core Counts below.
Base Frequency
10100:
The 10100’s 3.60 GHz base frequency is good for performance with professional tools, when not boosting. You can reach these base frequencies even without a high-end cooler.
9100:
The 9100’s 3.60 GHz base frequency is good for performance with professional tools, when not boosting. You can reach these base frequencies even without a high-end cooler.
Learn more about CPU Clock Speeds below.
Single-Core Turbo
10100:
With a high-end cooler, the 10100’s 4.30 GHz single-core max turbo boost frequency is excellent for performance with professional tools. You can maintain these frequencies with a high-end cooler.
9100:
With a high-end cooler, the 9100’s 4.20 GHz single-core max turbo boost frequency is excellent for performance with professional tools. You can maintain these frequencies with a high-end cooler.
Learn more about CPU Clock Speeds below.
P-Core Turbo
10100:
The 10100 does not have Performance cores.
9100:
The 9100 does not have Performance cores.
Learn more about CPU Clock Speeds below.
Overclocking Support
10100:
The 10100 CPU’s lack of support for overclocking cannot benefit performance with professional tools.
9100:
The 9100 CPU’s lack of support for overclocking cannot benefit performance with professional tools.
Learn more about Overclocking below.
DDR Support
10100:
The 10100 CPU’s support for DDR4 with a max stock speed of 2666 MHz can be mediocre for performance with professional tools.
9100:
The 9100 CPU’s support for DDR4 with a max stock speed of 2400 MHz can be poor for performance with professional tools.
Learn more about DDR Support below.
PCIe
10100:
The 10100 CPU’s support for PCIe 3.0 can be poor for performance with professional tools, as it will limit the potential of the latest SSDs and graphics cards.
9100:
The 9100 CPU’s support for PCIe 3.0 can be poor for performance with professional tools, as it will limit the potential of the latest SSDs and graphics cards.
L3 Cache
10100:
The 10100’s lackluster 6 MB of L3 cache is poor for performance with professional tools.
9100:
The 9100’s lackluster 6 MB of L3 cache is poor for performance with professional tools.
Learn more about Cache Sizes below.
Considerations When Choosing a CPU
Core Count
Intel’s Core i3-10100 CPUs have 4 cores.
Intel’s Core i3-9100 CPUs have 4 cores.
Increased core counts can improve the performance of games and professional tools that use them. Most modern games don’t benefit from having more than 6–8 cores. Even general apps can benefit from many cores when numerous applications are open simultaneously. Web browsers don’t significantly take advantage of multiple cores when loading a single page. However, more CPU cores can improve performance when running demanding web apps in multiple windows.
Intel’s 12th generation and newer CPUs have performance (P) cores and efficiency (E) cores. The P cores are comparable to previous generation cores. E cores are focused on adding additional threads in an energy-efficient manner. They take up much less room on the CPU and generate less heat. However, their smaller cache and minimal interconnect capabilities make them more appropriate for offloading background tasks.
CPU Clock Speeds
The Intel Core i3-10100 has a 3.60 GHz base frequency and supports a 4.30 GHz single-core max turbo boost frequency.
The Intel Core i3-9100 has a 3.60 GHz base frequency and supports a 4.20 GHz single-core max turbo boost frequency.
Single-core performance is essential for some games, as many don’t take full advantage of multiple cores. Professional tools depend on high single and multi-core turbo frequencies to maximize their processing speed.
Turbo boost frequencies are only achieved under ideal circumstances. The safest strategy for consistent gaming performance with a basic cooler is to get a processor with a higher base clock speed. However, with adequate cooling, you may be able to maintain speeds near the max boost frequency.
Check out my article, Choosing the Best CPU Cooler for Intel’s Core i3-10100, for recommended coolers that can maintain these boost frequencies on the 10100.
Check out my article, Choosing the Best CPU Cooler for Intel’s Core i3-9100, for recommended coolers that can maintain these boost frequencies on the 9100.
DDR Support
The 10100 CPU’s fastest supported DDR memory type is DDR4, with a max stock speed of 2666 MHz.
The 9100 CPU’s fastest supported DDR memory type is DDR4, with a max stock speed of 2400 MHz.
You can exceed these stock speeds officially supported by CPUs when overclocking memory, such as with an XMP profile. Motherboard specifications will indicate their supported overclocked-memory speeds. To be able to overclock DDR memory, your motherboard chipset needs to support memory overclocking.
Faster PC memory can improve game and professional tool performance by reducing the time it takes to perform calculations and data operations.
Using the quickest RAM may not have as much of an impact as upgrading your CPU and graphics card or adding more RAM.
Learn about our recommended RAM for the 10100 in Choosing the Best RAM for Intel’s Core i3-10100 CPU.
Learn about our recommended RAM for the 9100 in Choosing the Best RAM for Intel’s Core i3-9100 CPU.
Cache Size
The Intel Core i3-10100 has an L3 cache capacity of 6 MB.
The Intel Core i3-9100 has an L3 cache capacity of 6 MB.
A CPU’s cache is a small amount of memory, close to the CPU cores, containing recently used data. An L3 cache capacity of at least 20 MB is ideal for games and professional tool performance.
Games and professional tool performance can improve as cache size increases, as it can reduce delays when retrieving commonly used assets from memory. While nearly any task will use a CPU’s cache, a large cache becomes less impactful for general PC usage, such as browsing webpages.
Remember that cache sizes often increase with core counts, so if you want to increase your L3 cache, you may need to get a CPU with more cores.
Overclocking
The 10100 does not support overclocking.
The 9100 does not support overclocking.
Overclocking is mainly relevant for PC gamers who want to maximize their game framerates. CPU overclocking increases frequencies past their default limits. Excellent heat dissipation via fans or another solution is required to maintain system stability while overclocking.
Professional tools can benefit from overclocked frequencies. However, overclocking may introduce some possibility of system instability, which may be less acceptable in business scenarios.
Best AIO Liquid Cooler
Enermax Liqmax III 360
Check Price on Amazon
Amazon Affiliate Link
Best Air Cooler
Noctua NH-D15, Premium CPU Cooler
Check Price on Amazon
Amazon Affiliate Link
Learn More About the Intel Core i3-10100
- Which Chipsets Work With Intel’s Core i3-10100 CPU?
- Choosing the Best CPU Cooler for Intel’s Core i3-10100
- Choosing the Best Power Supply for Intel’s Core i3-10100
- Is the Core i3-10100 CPU Good for Gaming?
- Choosing the Best RAM for Intel’s Core i3-10100 CPU
- Choosing the Best Motherboard for Intel’s Core i3-10100
- How Many Cores Do Intel Core i3-10100 CPUs Have?
- What Is the TDP of the Core i3-10100 CPU?
You can find detailed 10100 specifications on Intel’s site.
Learn More About the Intel Core i3-9100
- Which Chipsets Work With Intel’s Core i3-9100 CPU?
- Choosing the Best CPU Cooler for Intel’s Core i3-9100
- Choosing the Best Power Supply for Intel’s Core i3-9100
- Is the Core i3-9100 CPU Good for Gaming?
- Choosing the Best RAM for Intel’s Core i3-9100 CPU
- Choosing the Best Motherboard for Intel’s Core i3-9100
- How Many Cores Do Intel Core i3-9100 CPUs Have?
- What Is the TDP of the Core i3-9100 CPU?
You can find detailed 9100 specifications on Intel’s site.
Have a suggestion or correction for this article? Send us an email at:
[email protected]
You can also contact the author at:
[email protected]
Intel Core i3-10100 vs Intel Core i3-9100: What is the difference?
51 BALLLA
Intel Core i3-10100
54 Ballla
Intel Core i3-9100
9000 Is 10100 better than Intel Core i3-9100?
- 266MHz higher RAM speed?
2666MHz vs 2400MHz - 4 more CPU threads?
8 vs 4 - 33. 56% higher PassMark score?
8974 vs 6719 - 4.1GB/s more memory bandwidth?
41.6GB/s vs 37.5GB/s - 64GB more max memory?
128GB vs 64GB - 23.47% higher Geekbench 5 multi-core result?
4109 vs 3328 - 12.0 higher performance per watt?
63.2 vs 51.2
Why is Intel Core i3-9100 better than Intel Core i3-10100?
- Supports memory troubleshooting code?
What are the most popular comparisons?
Intel Core i3-10100
VS
Intel Core i5-7400
Intel Core i3-9100
Intel Core i3-9100f
9000 10105
Intel Core i3-9100
VS
Intel Core i3-8100
Intel Core i3-10100
VS
Intel Core i3-10100f
Intel Core i3-9100
VS
Intel Core-6500 9000 9000 9000 -10100
VS
AMD Ryzen 3 3200G
Intel Core i3-9100
VS
Intel Core i5-8500
Intel Core I3-10100 VS
INTEL Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core 40004 -9100
vs
Intel Core i5-7400
Intel Core i3-10100
VS
Intel Core i5-3470
Intel Core i3-9100
VS
AMD Ryzen 5 5600g
Intel Core I3-1
AMD RYZEN 3 4100
Intel Core i3-9100
VS
Intel Core i3-9100t
Intel Core i3-10100
VS
VS I5-10400
Intel Core INTEL CORE INTEL CORE INTL
Intel Celeron G4930
Intel Core i3-10100
VS
Intel Core i7-3770
Intel Core i3-9100
Intel Core i7-9700
VS 9000 -7700
Comparison of prices
cheaper
Reviews of users
total rating
Intel Core i3-10100
5 Users
Intel Core i3-10100
/10 9000 /10 9000 /10 9000 /10 9000 /10 9000 /10 9000 /10,000 9000 /10,000 9000 /10,000 9000 /10,000 9000 /0004 5 Reviews of users
Intel Core i3-9100
4 Reviews of users
Intel Core i3-9100
/10
4 Reviews of users
Functions
9000 10
5 Votes
/10
4 Votes
Games
9. 2 /10
5 Votes
/10
Votes
004 performance
9.4 /10
5 Votes
/10
4 Votes
Reliability
9.2 /10
5 Votes
/10 9000.000 9000 9000 9
Energy efficiency
/10
5 Votes
/10
4 Votes
performance
1. Sproops of the central processor
4 x 3.6GHZ
4 x 3.6GHz
CPU speed indicates how many processing cycles per second the 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.
2nd processor thread
More threads result in better performance and better multitasking.
3.speed turbo clock
4.3GHz
4.2GHz
When the processor is running below its limits, it can jump to a higher clock speed to increase performance.
4. Unlocked
✖Intel Core i3-10100
✖Intel Core i3-9100
Some processors come with an unlocked multiplier and are easier to overclock, allowing for better performance in games and other applications.
5.L2 cache
More L2 scratchpad 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
0.25MB/core
0.25MB/core
More data can be stored in the L2 scratchpad for access by each processor core.
9.core L3
1.5MB/core
1.5MB/core
More data can be stored in L3 scratchpad memory to access each processor core.
Memory
1.RAM speed
2666MHz
2400MHz
Can support faster memory which speeds up system performance.
2.max memory bandwidth
41.6GB/s
37.5GB/s
This is the maximum rate at which data can be read from or stored in memory.
3. DDR version
DDR (Dynamic Dynamic Random Access Memory Double Data Rate) 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.maximum memory capacity
Maximum memory capacity (RAM).
6.bus baud rate
The bus is responsible for transferring data between different components of a computer or device.
7. Supports Memory Error Code
✖Intel Core i3-10100
✔Intel Core i3-9100
Memory Error Code can detect and repair 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. (Intel Core i3-10100)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i3-9100)
The 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. (Intel Core i3-10100)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i3-9100)
The bus is responsible for transferring data between various components of a computer or device
Geotagging
1. PassMark result
This test measures processor performance using multi-threading.
2. PassMark result (single)
This test measures processor performance using a thread of execution.
3.Geekbench 5 result (multi-core)
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. (Intel Core i3-9100)
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. (Intel Core i3-9100)
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)
Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform test that measures the single core performance of a processor. (Source: Primate Labs, 2022)
7. Blender test result (bmw27)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i3-10100)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i3-9100)
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. (Intel Core i3-10100)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i3-9100)
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
This means that the processor is more efficient, giving more performance per watt of power used.
Functions
1.uses multithreading
✔Intel Core i3-10100
✔Intel Core i3-9100
physical processor core into logical cores, also known as threads. Thus, each core can run two instruction streams at the same time.
2. Has AES
✔Intel Core i3-10100
✔Intel Core i3-9100
AES is used to speed up encryption and decryption.
3. Has AVX
✔Intel Core i3-10100
✔Intel Core i3-9100
AVX is used to help speed up calculations in multimedia, scientific and financial applications, and to improve the performance of the Linux RAID program.
4.Version SSE
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. Has F16C
✔Intel Core i3-10100
✔Intel Core i3-9100
F16C is used to speed up tasks such as adjusting image contrast or adjusting volume.
6.bits transmitted at the same time
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i3-10100)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i3-9100)
NEON provides faster media processing such as MP3 listening.
7. Has MMX
✔Intel Core i3-10100
✔Intel Core i3-9100
MMX is used to speed up tasks such as adjusting image contrast or adjusting volume.
8. Has TrustZone
✖Intel Core i3-10100
✖Intel Core i3-9100
The technology is integrated into the processor to ensure device security when using features such as mobile payments and streaming video using digital rights management technology ( DRM).
9.interface width
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i3-10100)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Intel Core i3-9100)
The processor can decode more instructions per clock (IPC), which means that the processor performs better
Price comparison
Cancel
Which CPUs are better?
Intel Core i3 9100 vs i3 10100:
performance comparison
VS
Intel Core i3 9100
Intel Core i3 10100
Which is better: Intel Core i3 9100 at 3. 6 GHz (with Turbo Boost up to 4.2) or i3 10100 at 3.6 GHz (with Turbo Boost up to 4.3)? To find out, read our comparative testing of these 4-core desktop processors in popular benchmarks, games and heavy applications.
- Overview
- Differences
- Performance
- Features
- Comments
Overview
Overview and comparison of the main metrics from NanoReview
Single -flow performance
Rating in tests using one kernel
Core I3 9100
58
Core i3 10100
60
Multi -flow performance
Tests in benchmarks, where all nuclei
Core 9000 9000 are involved 20
Core i3 10100
26
Energy efficiency
Efficiency of energy consumption by chip
Core i3 9100
51
Core i3 10100
56
Rating NanoreView
Final rating of the processor
Core I3 9100
9000 9000 45 9000 9000 9000 9,000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 Core 9000
Key differences
What are the main differences between 10100 and 9100
Reasons to choose Intel Core i3 10100
- Supports up to 128GB DDR4-2666
- 1 year and 1 month later than rival
- 4. 1 GB/s (11%) higher maximum memory bandwidth
- 2% higher Turbo Boost frequency (4.3 GHz vs 4.2 GHz)
Benchmark tests
Compare the results of processor tests in benchmarks
Cinebench R23 (single core)
Core i3 9100
1065
Core i3 10100
+8%
1146
Cinebench R23 (multi-core)
Core i3 9100
3718
Core i3 10100
+52%
5640
Passmark CPU (single core)
Core i3 9100
2545
Core i3 10100
+4%
2659
Passmark CPU (multi-core)
Core i3 9100
6679
Core i3 10100
+33%
8850
Geekbench 5 (single core)
Core i3 9100
+1%
1065
Core i3 10100
1054
Geekbench 5 (multi-core)
Core i3 9100
3477
Core i3 10100
+23%
4270
▶️ Add your score to Cinebench R23
Specifications
List of full specifications of the Intel Core i3 9100 and i3 10100
General information
Manufacturer | Intel | Intel |
Release date | April 23, 2019 | May 1, 2020 |
Type | Desktop | Desktop |
Instruction set architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 |
Codename | Coffee Lake | Comet Lake-S |
Model number | i3-9100 | i3-10100 |
Socket | LGA-1151 | LGA-1200 |
Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics 630 | UHD Graphics 630 |
Performance
Number of cores | 4 | 4 |
Number of threads | 4 | 8 |
Frequency | 3. 6 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
Max. frequency in Turbo Boost | 4.2 GHz | 4.3 GHz |
Bus frequency | 100 MHz | 100 MHz |
Multiplier | 37x | 36x |
Tire speed | 8 GT/s | 8 GT/s |
Level 1 cache | 64KB (per core) | 64KB (per core) |
Level 2 cache | 256KB (per core) | 256KB (per core) |
Level 3 cache | 6MB (shared) | 6MB (shared) |
Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Power consumption
Process | 14 nanometers | 14 nanometers |
Power consumption (TDP) | 65 W | 65 W |
Critical temperature | 100°C | 100°C |
Integrated graphics | Intel UHD Graphics 630 | Intel UHD Graphics 630 |
GPU frequency | 350 MHz | 350 MHz |
Boost GPU frequency | 1100 MHz | 1100 MHz |
Shader blocks | 192 | 192 |
TMUs | 24 | 24 |
ROPs | 3 | 3 |
Computer units | 24 | 24 |
TGP | 15W | 15W |
Max. resolution | 4096×2304 — 60Hz | 4096×2304 — 60Hz |
Igpu Flops
Core i3 9100
0.38 Teraflops
Core i3 10100
0.38 Teraflops
Support for memory
Other
Official site | Site Intel Core i3 9100 | Site Intel Core i3 10100 |
PCI Express version | 3.0 | 3.0 |
Max. PCI Express lanes | 16 | 16 |
Extended instructions | SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX-2 | — |
Poll
What processor do you think is the best?
Core i3 9100
15 (22. 1%)
Core i3 10100
53 (77.9%)
Total votes: 68
Competitors
1.
Core i3 10100 vs Ryzen 3 3200G
2.
Core i3 10100 vs Core i5 10400
3.
Core i3 10100 vs Ryzen 5 4600G
4.
Core i3 10100 vs Core i3 12100
5.
Core i3 10100 vs Ryzen 5 Pro 4650G
6.
Core i3 10100 vs Ryzen 3 Pro 4350G
7.
Core i3 10100 vs Core i3 10100F
What will you choose: Intel Core i3 10100 or i3 9100?
Name
Message
Intel Core i3-12100, i3-10100, i3-9100, i3-8100, i3-7100 and i3-6100 test — i2HARD
i3-12100 turned out to be a nice processor. 4 cores, 8 threads and high performance per core make it feel good in almost all modern games. But how have the i3 changed over the past generations? Let’s refresh our memory. Let’s walk through the youngest models that support DDR4.
Contents:
- Evolution of the Intel Core i3 to DDR4
- Test bench
- Stock
- Benchmark tests
- Tests in games
- Acceleration
- Benchmark tests
- Tests in games
- Conclusion
The evolution of the Intel Core i3 on DDR4
The first was the i3-6100, introduced in the third quarter of the already distant 2015. With him, he had only 2 cores and 4 threads at a frequency of 3700 MHz, and the maximum supported DDR4 frequency on motherboards with a chipset other than Z was only 2133 MHz.
A year and a half later, the i3-7100 came out. And he did not carry striking differences. The frequency of the same two cores is slightly higher, the maximum supported memory frequency is slightly higher. Even the renamed integrated graphics received +100 MHz on the chip, and nothing more.
The i3-8100 ended a seven-generation dual-core carnival. Finally, we were given 4 full-fledged cores, and with them the processor caches doubled. True, in order to maintain TDP, the core frequency (-300 MHz) had to be sacrificed. The newly renamed integrated graphics have become worse on all fronts. 1 out of 24 execution units was lost, and the frequency became lower by 50 MHz.
With the i3-9100, gamers once again lost their joy. In fact, it was the same 8100, but with turbo boost turned on. At the same time, the price of the processor increased from the recommended $117 to 122, but later processors with the new F index were released without integrated graphics, but the price was lower by $25.
4 cores didn’t stay in i3 for long without multithreading. 10100 got Hyper-threading technology. The frequencies of the cores and memory grew slightly again, but otherwise it was a processor on almost the same core microarchitecture as its predecessors.
In the 11th generation, Intel decided not to encourage budget desktop gaming by re-released the same processor with a 100 MHz increase in frequency. And among the 12 different 10th generation i3s, none had an unlocked multiplier. They closed the shop. At the same time, it should be noted that motherboards based on the B560 and H570 chipsets have begun to support full-fledged memory overclocking.
The
i3-12100 brings a new core microarchitecture to the 10nm process. Given the missed episode 11, IPC has been increased by 19% twice. The maximum DDR4 frequency on boards with the H610 chipset has increased to 3200 MHz. In addition to it, support for DDR5 appeared. In many ways, this i3 is similar to the 6100. There was also no 5th gen i3 before, the same supported 2 types of memory, both of which can be seriously overclocked on the bus on select motherboards. New microarchitecture and so on.
The 12100 integrated graphics received a 27% frequency increase. This is the same microarchitecture as the last generation i5, and was the youngest in the line.
Test Bench
Now that we’ve brushed up on the evolution of the i3, it’s time to compare them. We have only four copies on hand: 7100, 9100, 10100 and 12100, but as you might guess, we have no problem imitating 6100 and 8100. 2: Intel Core i3-9100F
Don’t let the list of motherboards intimidate you. We will run stock tests using the memory in JEDEC mode, which corresponds to the maximum supported frequency on the younger chipset. Except that for the i3-12100 it makes no sense to use JEDEC, since the market is overflowing with budget memory with XMP 3200 MHz CL16.
i3 cooling has never been an issue, and overheating the motherboard VRM with these processors is not an easy task. Even the AIDA FPU stress test can’t squeeze out 9100 65 watts. Of course, all these values depend both on temperatures and on motherboards and processors themselves, but in general the picture is clear. 10100 turns out to be colder than 9100 due to the low voltage, and 12100 with almost the same Vcore is a third more voracious. Given that motherboard power systems have evolved along with processors, 70 watts is not a problem for them.
But Intel’s boxed cooler hasn’t changed in terms of efficiency. Even if he manages, the noise he makes is too high.
All JEDECs have a close timing/frequency ratio, but other things being equal, a higher frequency is preferable. The higher memory latency of the i3-8100 compared to the 7100 looks logical, because it has a lower ring bus frequency, but besides this, the i3-10100 catches the eye. Its latency is noticeably higher, and 12100, despite a much more successful memory configuration, cannot boast of this indicator. But the speed of its caches is beyond praise.
Stock
Benchmark tests
In the CPU-Z test, it is interesting to see how the i3-10100 scored 24% more points in a single thread than 6100. And their frequency differs by a maximum of 16%. Yes, and 8100 should have scored less points than 7100 due to the lower frequency.
Everything looks more logical in Cinebench R23. In 6.5 years, i3 single-threaded performance has increased by 72%, while a year ago one could boast only 15%. And in the multi-threaded test, the difference between 10100 and 12100 is greater than between any other pair of i3s with a difference of 2 generations.
Geekbench 5, which depends on the memory subsystem, showed a smaller edge over the last two i3s. Perhaps it’s a matter of memory latency, or maybe performance on tasks with more than 4 threads no longer affects the final score so much. It remains only to guess.
Thanks to 5 generations of improvements, the i3-12100 is able to render a scene in Adobe Premiere Pro 3 times faster than the dual-core 6100. But more interesting is how the i3 feels in various games.
Tests in games
Let’s not delay. Cyberpunk, minimal preset, high textures, low crowd density. Remembering 45 FPS on average on the i5-6400, we ran cyberpunk with the expectation of a high difficulty of passing the test segment on the i3-6100 and 7100. But no, it is quite playable. Considering that most of the shootings in the game take place in static scenes, there will be more FPS there, which means that all i3s are calmly “pulling” this game. However, it is worth noting that the 12100 with such an overwhelming advantage will allow you to go through it with a much higher level of comfort.
Far Cry 6, low graphics preset, FoV 90. This series of games has always been characterized by a weak ability to distribute the load among processor threads. i3-10100 will not let you lie. Due to hyperthreading, as well as a slightly higher frequency of cores and memory, it had a 37% increase in the average FPS in cyberpunk. And then what? Only by 10. However, at the same time, stutters constantly appear on four-threaded processors both in the benchmark and in the game itself. The i3-12100 once again proved the versatility of increasing per-core performance, showing an almost 1.5-fold superiority over the 10100.
Shadow of the Tomb Raider, low graphics preset. The third benchmark scene is special. 4-threaded processors not only cannot immediately render the mountain, but the scene itself was loaded almost an order of magnitude longer. The i3-10100 did this in less than 10 seconds, while the 9100 took a whopping 75 seconds. Interestingly, the i3-8100 managed another 5 seconds longer, and when we expected unimaginably long loading on a dual-core 7100, the same 5 second increase was surprising. Due to the unloaded mountain, the average FPS was distorted, since while it was not there, 7100 gave out close to 10100 FPS, and 9100 to 12100.
Equally interesting is how the i3 feel in 2010’s StarCraft II. Are they able to pull the maximum settings? Of course, since the release, the game has been improved, but still? In a replay of a tough battle-packed match, even the i3-12100 drops below 60fps. The game is parallelized by only 2 threads, so all participants have this necessary minimum. But due to the fact that the 10100 has no advantages over the 9100 other than hyper-threading and 100 MHz cores, its FPS is equal to its predecessor.
Since we checked Starcraft at maximum speeds, let’s take a look at Troy. Everything is as it should be: ultra preset, unit sizes and grass — extreme. If you do not give the slideshow much attention, then we again see the fact that the hyperthreading of the i3-10100 does not give it a 35% increase, as in some benchmarks or games, but almost 70%. “How so?” — you ask. Here you can give an example from life. Let’s say you and a friend are putting things in a closet. Together it will be done about twice as fast. Okay, what if you need to take it down to the first floor? How many times longer will you lower it yourself? Also here.
The last one is CS:GO at minimum wages as a representative of popular session games like Dota, Tanks and so on. These games have always been characterized by low requirements so that as many users as possible can stick to them. According to our old measurements, Contra received an increase of about 3.5 threads, but unlike Starcraft, 10100 has at least some advantage over 9100 in it. It is unlikely that this is entirely the merit of 100 MHz in cores and a higher frequency JEDEC. i3-12100, in turn, demonstrates exactly one and a half times superiority over its predecessor.
If we take the performance of the i3-6100 as 100%, then on average for the ward 7100 came out 7% faster due to minor improvements. Replacing two cores with hyperthreading with 4 without it led to much bigger changes. FPS increased by an average of a third. A further increase in frequency due to the inclusion of a turbo boost gave another 7%. The 4 hyper-threaded cores that came with the i3-10100 are no longer such a stable gain. In old or simply not optimized games for good parallelization, the increase is also modest, but in most modern games this gives about 30% additional frames. In some games, in addition to an increase in FPS, additional streams give a normal level loading speed or a more even frametime. Not only the third scene in Lara takes a long time to load on 4 threads. A number of games have the same problem. The brightest was i3-12100. Due to the skipped generation, as well as the ability to enable the most popular XMP even on the cheapest motherboard, and, of course, the incredibly increased IPC, it surpassed its predecessor by almost 1.5 times. And those who want to upgrade after 5 generations will receive an almost threefold increase.
Overclocking
It will be equally interesting to see how memory overclocking affected the viability of all these i3s. There will be no overclocking of cores on the bus, since we have a simulated 6100, and we explained the inappropriateness of this for 12100 in a review dedicated to it.
Memory overclocking is a more rational solution. Now it allows you to make even a B chipset, and in the days of 10100 and earlier, some motherboards based on the Z chipset were not much more expensive than the initial ones, plus some people took them for an upgrade. Of course, the well-known ballistics did not exist when the i3-6100 was released, but you yourself understand that you will get confused with a hodgepodge of different kits, and we will even more so, so we will use the same kit for all systems.
So, overclocking. In addition to improving the memory controller in processors, motherboards have also progressed, so for the simulated i3-6100 and 8100 we made a symbolic reduction in frequency by a step. In fact, the 7100 and 9100 should have been overclocked better, but there were no motherboards corresponding to their generation. The peak of high-frequency memory overclocking fell on the 10th generation of Intel processors, in the eleventh they added a memory divider similar to that of Ryzen, and overclocking was often limited to 3733 MHz. Since there was no i3 in that generation, a higher frequency limit reached 12100 in the Gear 1 mode, but another trip in the face of a limited voltage on the memory controller of processors with a locked multiplier again did not let it go wild. We were lucky. 3800 MHz can be called successful overclocking. Some samples even 3600 MHz are not available.
Tests in benchmarks
The balance of power of the first five processors in Hades has not changed. With each new generation, overclocking was more and more successful, but 12100 turned out to be at the level of 8100. Nevertheless, Aida assigned it a very high memory bandwidth, surpassing even 10100, although Aida can lie. However, an incomprehensible increase in memory latency in the 11th and 12th generation, all other things being equal, in combination with the absence of near-symbolic overclocking on the bus, led to a 17% increase in this very latency resulted in the i3-12100.
In memory-independent CPU-Z and Cinebench, the alignment of forces has not changed much. i3-12100 with the same result, the rest of the scores increased in accordance with the 2.5% increase in the frequency of the cores.
GeekBench 5 and Premiere Pro are pretty much the same. Due to less memory overclocking, everyone closed the gap on the 12100, and the 10100, which received the best overclocking, increased the result the most.
Tests in games
With overclocking, 7100 almost overtook the stock result of 8100. And in general, almost 60 FPS while driving on a difficult road is a good result. True, the frametime is still lame, especially during accidents. 12100, in turn, cannot boast of a high gain from overclocking. If earlier, due to XMP instead of JEDEC and its twice improved microarchitecture, it had a 40% advantage over 10100, now the difference has been reduced to 23%.
In Far Cry 6, memory overclocking did not help get rid of stutters for four-threaded processors. But the gameplay itself has definitely become smoother due to the increased FPS. If for 12100 the tuned memory gave only 11% increase, then for 10100 it is already 24%, for 9100 — 22%. The 8100 got 16% extra frames, while the 7100 and 6100 increased their FPS by a quarter. And there are two sides of the coin. On the one hand, memory overclocking will increase in any game, on the other hand, in some cases it would be more expedient to purchase i5 on a budget board.
In Lara, memory overclocking accelerated both the loading of the mountain and the loading of the third scene itself, but not by much. For all four-threaded processors, it was reduced by 10-15 seconds and still lasted longer than a minute. In fact, we have long noticed that memory overclocking does not eliminate problems. It just increases FPS. If you had uneven frametime in Cyberpunk, then it will remain so after overclocking, but will shift to a more comfortable area. If Far Cry stutters, then the stutters aren’t going anywhere. How long did it take for the game to load? So it will remain. But additional cores with such a modest number of them are quite capable of helping.
Starcraft doesn’t care about memory bandwidth, it would seem. But given that some processors started with a memory frequency of a little more than 2000 MHz, and overclocking also reduces latency, the increase here turned out to be worse than in FarCry. 6100 accelerated by a third, 7100 — by 28%, 8100, 9100 and 10100 — by 20, 22 and 26%, respectively, but 12100 — by the same 11%. What does it say? The fact that paying extra for the ability to overclock memory in these kinds of games gives more than opting for i5. True, it is very difficult to guess the games involved in this list, as well as to predict your future dedicated to them.
In Troy, the unimaginable gain from hyper-threading 10100 has not gone away, and in combination with a more successful memory configuration, it has exceeded 70%. All the other i3s, funny enough, increased their FPS by 2 units. But if for 6100 this is a 20% increase, then for 12100 it is only 5%.
Growth in Contra is slightly lower than in StarCraft. The already high FPS has become even higher, allowing you to get headroom for background tasks, high settings, or for more complex scenarios.
Globally, nothing has changed on average in the ward. 12100 lost positions, 10100, on the contrary.
Conclusion
Considering the remaster of the 10th gen i3 instead of the release of the 11th, something like a tick-tock can be clearly traced. Only if earlier it was a series of transitions to a new technical process, and then its refinement, then recently other tools have been used to increase productivity, leading to similar spasmodic gains. I wonder if the i3-13100 will break this tradition?
As for overclocking, it remains only to repeat everything that was said earlier. The graph below shows how much processors gained on average from memory overclocking and a small bus overclocking. Growths of less than 1% and 0.1% coincide with those in average FPS, which once again confirms that memory overclocking does not get rid of stutters or torn frametime. It is also noticeable that for the 12100 memory overclocking is not a big deal, especially since it could be worse if the memory controller is less successful. Also, do not forget that the possibility of squeezing the timings is present on all boards. And compared to the configured timings, the gain from full overclocking will not be so impressive. Roughly speaking, you can cut it in half.
just add Hyper-Threading GECID.com. Page 1
::>Processors
>2020
> Intel Core i3-10100
10-07-2020
Page 1
Page 2
One page
Intel Core i3-10100 is a representative of the 14nm Comet Lake-S line — the latest of the Skylake family. It includes six familiar episodes. They did not bring any significant innovations.
Significant innovations include the transition to the new Socket LGA1200, guaranteed support for faster memory, increased L3 cache memory for some models, increased clock speeds and improved overclocking potential of versions with an unlocked multiplier. The Celeron and Pentium series would like to see more cores and threads, but Intel decided not to take away this dream from us, but to realize it in future generations.
In general, Comet Lake-S does not look very good, especially against the background of a competitor, but in fact, everything is not as sad as it might seem at first glance. We will get acquainted with the new line using the example of the most affordable representative of the Core i3 series.
First, let’s look at the specifications of the Core i 3-10100 and its predecessor. The recommended price has not changed, but the novelty offers 4 additional streams, a dynamic frequency bonus of 100 MHz and support for DDR4-2666 memory instead of 2400. The configuration of the graphics core, cache memory and thermal package remained unchanged.
We couldn’t get a Core i3-9100 for comparison, but we have an almost identical Core i3-9100F . Of the differences, it only has a blocked video core, but in this test we need it like a saddle for a cow. If you are interested in the capabilities of this chip in games with different video cards, then we have several materials on this topic.
Ryzen 5 3500 was taken as an external opponent. It’s a 6-core, 6-thread Zen 2 microarchitecture with 16MB L3 cache, DDR4-3200 memory support, and a 65W TDP. For sale, the new Core i3 and this Ryzen 5 are in the same $150 price bracket.
Now let’s go through the updated stands. To increase the speed and convenience of testing, we decided to immediately prepare three separate system units, equipping them with the same components. For the LGA1200, we took the MSI MAG Z490 Tomahawk gaming motherboard based on the Intel Z490. It differs from the Z390 chipset by supporting faster Wi-Fi 6 network modules and a 2.5-gigabit LAN controller. Otherwise, no innovation, so Intel partners had to puzzle over how to surprise and please customers in new boards.
The MAG Z490 Tomahawk strikes a balance between features and price. You will certainly take this board for overclocking a powerful processor, and immediately appreciate the 14-phase power subsystem with Core Boost technology and two connectors for stable operation. If you don’t want to bother with manual overclocking — no problem, Game Boost technology will do everything automatically. It will not squeeze the maximum out of the system, but everything will work stably.
RAM can be overclocked up to 4800 MHz, and fast M.2 SSDs have two slots with their own heatsinks. But when they are installed, some SATA ports will not be available. It is better to take a video card one and more powerful — there is a slot with a reinforced design for it. The second PCIe x16 receives only 4 lanes from the chipset.
Also, the novelty pleases with two LAN controllers (gigabit from Intel and 2.5 gigabit from Realtek), an 8-channel audio subsystem based on the top Realtek ALC1200-VD1 codec, a 20-gigabit USB 3. 2 Type-C port and LED- backlight. And this is not a complete list of its advantages, but other components need to be presented.
For Coffee Lake Refresh processors, we will use the MSI MPG Z390 Gaming Plus board. This is an interesting option for those who want to assemble a relatively inexpensive gaming system on a board with a top-end chipset of the last generation. It will allow you to overclock the processor and memory, install a couple of fast M.2 SSDs, a massive video card and a Wi-Fi 5 wireless interface module. We also liked the dedicated pads for connecting the processor LSS.
For Socket AM4, they wanted to take the MEG X570 GODLIKE board, so that all three would be from the same brand with similar BIOSes, but it did not fit into the case. Searching for three identical EATX cases is more problematic than replacing the ASRock X570 Phantom Gaming 4 . We remember it with two M.2 slots, but without heatsinks, diagnostic indicators for quickly identifying a problem at system startup, a reinforced main PCIe x16 slot and support for a Wi-Fi 5 module. It resembles the MSI MPG Z39 in terms of capabilities0 Gaming Plus, for AMD platform only.
Three identical 2-section dropsy ID-COOLING Zoomflow 240X ARGB are responsible for cooling the processors. They support 250-watt AMD and Intel chips on current and legacy platforms. You could look for 3-section ones, but then you would have to think again about replacing the cases, which would weigh more and take up more space. The LSS themselves are pleased with an improved motor in the water block, a pair of efficient and relatively quiet 120 mm fans with hydraulic bearings, as well as bright illumination of the turntables and the water block. There were no problems with the assembly and the efficiency of their work.
RAM is represented by 2-channel 16 GB kit DDR 4-5000 CORSAIR VENGEANCE LPX with low profile radiators. In terms of frequency, they took it with a huge margin to fit any systems and experiments. During the tests, the memory will work in the guaranteed or recommended mode for the processor at suitable timings. Later, we will add overclocking tests to compare with the nominal and know whether it is worth chasing faster RAM.
The video card will be one for all three systems, but for the time being the top ASUS ROG STRIX GeForce RTX 2080 Ti Advanced edition . It occupies almost 3 slots and weighs decently — it was for such models that reinforced PCIe x16 slots were created. And in terms of performance, it definitely will not become a bottleneck in Full HD.
For the operating system, game clients and the necessary software, each system unit will have its own SSD Apacer AS340 for 240 GB. The games themselves and benchmarks were recorded on a similar model with a capacity of 960 GB. This wanderer will wander from stand to stand. Why didn’t you get an M.2 SSD, you ask? There are several reasons. A recent test showed that for games and a regular SATA SSD, in most cases it is enough for the eyes. Secondly, if you have to change the board, then there will definitely be no problems with regular SATA. Plus, you can not be afraid of overheating, and their speed indicators are in order: sequential read and write speeds are in the region of 500 MB / s, and when working with 4-kilobyte blocks, they give out more than 200 MB / s.
We collected all three systems in relatively inexpensive cases Cougar MX330-G with a tempered glass side window. Our video card takes up more than 300 mm, but there was enough space for it. A couple of solid state drives can be hidden behind the motherboard tray. There is also space for hidden cabling. And for the 240-mm LSS, there was a cozy place on the front panel. I am glad that a metal mesh is used there, and not glass. To improve air circulation, one fan was installed in each case Cougar FW 120 WHITE .
Three «gold» blocks Seasonic FOCUS GX-650 were entrusted with taking care of the stable power supply of the systems. We figured that even with voracious older processors, they would be enough for overclocking. And we can safely load the systems, knowing that the power supplies will be able to work reliably even with overload thanks to modern circuitry, Japanese capacitors and a full list of protections. You can’t exactly call them budget, but stable and quiet operation for 10 guaranteed years inspires optimism.
Everything, systems assembled and ready for testing. Let’s start with synthetics. We know that many squander it, so we will not focus much attention.
So, work with RAM in AIDA 64 accelerated at least 20% when changing generations. Ryzen 5 lags behind only in write speed.
And in terms of latency, the Core i3-10100 has no equal.
Geekbench 5 is 9% faster in single-threaded tasks and 28% faster in multi-threaded tasks, but the 6-core Ryzen 5 is still faster.
V 3 DMark Time Spy we are most interested in the CPU Score, and here 10100 reaches an indistinguishable 10100 Ry3F5.
In the comprehensive test PCMark 10 Ryzen 5 as a whole regains its leadership, but the advantage over the 8-thread new product does not exceed 5%. She herself breaks away from her predecessor by a maximum of 16.5%.
Rendering the pavilion barcelona scene in Blender with 9100F will take half an hour of your life, and with 10100 everything will be almost 10 minutes faster. Ryzen 5 will save a couple more minutes.
A similar situation is observed in V — Ray : we gain 35-45% from the generation change, but the six-core “ryazhenka” is still faster.
Logically summarized in Cinebench R20 : 10100 44% faster 9100F in the CPU test, but in single-threaded mode, the bonus is only 6%. Ryzen 5 is faster than new items by 22 and 7.5%, respectively. The cores rule!
Comparison of Intel Core i3-10100 and Intel Core i3-9100
Comparative analysis of the Intel Core i3-10100 and Intel Core i3-9100 processors by all known characteristics in the categories: General information, Performance, Memory, Graphics, Graphical interfaces, Picture quality in graphics, Graphics API support, Compatibility, Peripherals, Security and reliability , Technology, Virtualization.
Analysis of processor performance by benchmarks: PassMark — Single thread mark, PassMark — CPU mark, 3DMark Fire Strike — Physics Score, Geekbench 4 — Single Core, Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core, GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps).
Intel Core i3-10100
versus
Intel Core i3-9100
Benefits
Reasons to choose Intel Core i3-10100
- Newer processor, release date difference 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 4 more threads
- About 2% more clock speed: 4. 30 GHz vs 4.20 GHz
- Maximum memory size 2 times more: 128 GB vs 64 GB
- Performance in PassMark — Single thread mark benchmark about 5% more : 2631 vs 2514
- Performance in PassMark benchmark — CPU mark about 32% better: 8766 vs 6629
8 vs 4
Release date | 27 May 2020 vs 23 Apr 2019 |
Number of threads | 8 vs 4 |
Maximum frequency | 4.30 GHz vs 4.20 GHz |
Maximum memory size | 128 GB vs 64 GB |
PassMark — Single thread mark | 2631 vs 2514 |
PassMark — CPU mark | 8766 vs 6629 |
Benchmark comparison
CPU 1: Intel Core i3-10100
CPU 2: Intel Core i3-9100
PassMark — Single thread mark |
|
|||
PassMark — CPU mark |
|
Name | Intel Core i3-10100 | Intel Core i3-9100 |
---|---|---|
PassMark — Single thread mark | 2631 | 2514 |
PassMark — CPU mark | 8766 | 6629 |
3DMark Fire Strike — Physics Score | 4780 | |
Geekbench 4 — Single Core | 1068 | |
Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core | 3267 | |
GFXBench 4. 0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1602 | |
GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames) | 2758 | |
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames) | 5007 | |
GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1602 | |
GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps) | 2758 | |
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps) | 5007 |
Feature comparison
Intel Core i3-10100 | Intel Core i3-9100 | |
---|---|---|
Architecture name | Comet Lake | Coffee Lake |
Issue date | 27 May 2020 | 23 Apr 2019 |
Place in rating | 505 | 630 |
Processor Number | i3-10100 | i3-9100 |
Series | 10th Generation Intel Core i3 Processors | 9th Generation Intel Core i3 Processors |
Status | Launched | Launched |
Applicability | Desktop | Desktop |
Price at first issue date | $122 | |
64 bit support | ||
Base frequency | 3. 60 GHz | 3.60 GHz |
Bus Speed | 8 GT/s | 8 GT/s |
Level 1 cache | 256KB | 256KB |
Level 2 cache | 1MB | 1MB |
Level 3 cache | 6MB | 6MB |
Technological process | 14nm | 14nm |
Maximum core temperature | 100°C | 100°C |
Maximum frequency | 4. 30 GHz | 4.20 GHz |
Number of cores | 4 | 4 |
Number of threads | 8 | 4 |
Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 72 °C | |
Maximum number of memory channels | 2 | 2 |
Maximum memory bandwidth | 41.6 GB/s | 37.5 GB/s |
Maximum memory size | 128GB | 64GB |
Supported memory types | DDR4-2666 | DDR4-2400 |
ECC support | ||
Device ID | 0x9BC8 | 0x3E91 |
Graphics base frequency | 350 MHz | 350 MHz |
Graphics max dynamic frequency | 1. 10 GHz | 1.10 GHz |
Intel® Clear Video Technology HD | ||
Intel® Clear Video Technology | ||
Intel® InTru™ 3D Technology | ||
Intel® Quick Sync Video | ||
Video memory size | 64GB | 64GB |
Integrated graphics | Intel UHD Graphics 630 | Intel UHD Graphics 630 |
Maximum number of monitors supported | 3 | 3 |
4K support | ||
Maximum resolution via DisplayPort | [email protected] | [email protected] |
Maximum resolution via eDP | [email protected] | [email protected] |
Maximum resolution via HDMI 1. 4 | [email protected] | [email protected] |
DirectX | 12 | 12 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Maximum number of processors in | 1 | 1 |
Package Size | 37.5mm x 37.5mm | 37.5mm x 37.5mm |
Supported sockets | FCLGA1200 | FCLGA1151 |
Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 65 Watt |
Thermal Solution | PCG 2015C | PCG 2015C (65W) |
Number of PCI Express lanes | 16 | 16 |
PCI Express revision | 3. 0 | 3.0 |
PCIe configurations | Up to 1×16, 2×8, 1×8+2×4 | Up to 1×16, 2×8, 1×8+2×4 |
Scalability | 1S Only | 1S Only |
Execute Disable Bit (EDB) | ||
Intel® Identity Protection Technology | ||
Intel® OS Guard | ||
Intel® Secure Key Technology | ||
Intel® Software Guard Extensions (Intel® SGX) | ||
Intel® Trusted Execution Technology (TXT) | ||
Secure Boot | ||
Intel® Memory Protection Extensions (Intel® MPX) | ||
Enhanced Intel SpeedStep® Technology | ||
Idle States | ||
Extended instructions | Intel SSE4. 1, Intel SSE4.2, Intel AVX2 | Intel SSE4.1, Intel SSE4.2, Intel AVX2 |
Intel 64 | ||
Intel® AES New Instructions | ||
Intel® Hyper-Threading Technology | ||
Intel® Optane™ Memory Supported | ||
Intel® Stable Image Platform Program (SIPP) | ||
Intel® Thermal Velocity Boost | ||
Intel® Turbo Boost Technology | ||
Intel® vPro™ Platform Eligibility | ||
Thermal Monitoring | ||
Intel® Advanced Vector Extensions (AVX) | ||
Intel® TSX-NI | ||
Intel® Virtualization Technology (VT-x) | ||
Intel® Virtualization Technology for Directed I/O (VT-d) | ||
Intel® VT-x with Extended Page Tables (EPT) |
Intel Core i5-9600 vs.
Intel Core i3-10100
Intel Core i5-9600
Intel Core i5-9600 runs with 6 and 6 CPU threads It runs at 4.60 GHz base 4.10 GHz all cores while TDP is set to 65 W .The processor connects to LGA 1151- CPU socket 2 This version includes 9.00 MB of L3 cache on a single die, supports 2 to support DDR4-2666 RAM, and supports 3.0 PCIe Gen 16 . Tjunction is kept below 100°C degrees C. Specifically, Coffee Lake S Refresh Architecture is advanced beyond 14 nm and supports VT-x, VT-x EPT, VT-d . The product was launched Q2/2019
Intel Core i3-10100
Intel Core i3-10100 runs with 4 and 6 CPU threads It runs at 4.30 GHz base 4.10 GHz all cores while TDP is set to 65 W .The processor connects to LGA 1200 CPU socket This version includes 6.00 MB of L3 cache on a single die, supports 2 to support DDR4-2666 RAM, and supports 3.0 PCIe Gen 16 . Tjunction is kept below 100°C degrees C. Specifically, the Comet Lake S architecture is advanced beyond 14 nm and supports VT-x, VT-x EPT, VT-d . The product was launched Q2/2020
Intel Core i5-9600
Intel Core i3-10100
Intel UHD Graphics 630
Intel UHD Graphics 630
Show more details
Show more details
Cinebench R23 (Single-Core)
Cinebench R23 is the successor to Cinebench R20 and is also based on the Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is software used all over the world to create 3D forms. The single-core test uses only one CPU core, the number of cores or hyper-threading capability is not taken into account.
Cinebench R23 (Multi-Core)
Cinebench R23 is the successor to Cinebench R20 and is also based on the Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is software used all over the world to create 3D forms. The multi-core test uses all the CPU cores and has a big advantage of hyper-threading.
Cinebench R20 (Single-Core)
Cinebench R20 is the successor to Cinebench R15 and is also based on the Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is software used all over the world to create 3D forms. The single-core test uses only one CPU core, the number of cores or hyper-threading capability is not taken into account.
Cinebench R20 (Multi-Core)
Cinebench R20 is the successor to Cinebench R15 and is also based on Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is software used all over the world to create 3D forms. The multi-core test uses all the CPU cores and has a big advantage of hyper-threading.
Cinebench R15 (Single-Core)
Cinebench R15 is the successor to Cinebench 11.5 and is also based on the Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is software used all over the world to create 3D forms. The single-core test uses only one CPU core, the number of cores or hyper-threading capability is not taken into account.
Cinebench R15 (Multi-Core)
Cinebench R15 is the successor to Cinebench 11.5 and is also based on Cinema 4 Suite. Cinema 4 is software used all over the world to create 3D forms. The multi-core test uses all the CPU cores and has a big advantage of hyper-threading.
Geekbench 5, 64bit (Single-Core)
Geekbench 5 is a memory-intensive cross-platform benchmark. A fast memory will greatly push the result. The single-core test uses only one CPU core, the number of cores or hyper-threading capability is not taken into account.
Geekbench 5, 64bit (Multi-Core)
Geekbench 5 is a memory-intensive, cross-platform test. A fast memory will greatly push the result. The multi-core test uses all the CPU cores and has a big advantage of hyper-threading.
iGPU — FP32 Performance (Single-precision GFLOPS)
Theoretical processing performance of the processor’s internal graphics unit with simple precision (32 bits) in GFLOPS. GFLOPS specifies how many billions of floating point operations the iGPU can perform per second.
Geekbench 3, 64bit (Single-Core)
Geekbench 3 is a cross-platform test that is memory intensive. A fast memory will greatly push the result. The single-core test uses only one CPU core, the number of cores or hyper-threading capability is not taken into account.
Geekbench 3, 64bit (Multi-Core)
Geekbench 3 is a cross-platform benchmark that is memory intensive. A fast memory will greatly push the result. The multi-core test uses all the CPU cores and has a big advantage of hyper-threading.
Estimated results for PassMark CPU Mark
Some of the processors listed below have been tested with CPU-Comparison.