But it is far ahead of its predecessor
We already met with the older Intel Comet Lake-S processors, it’s time to learn about the capabilities of the younger models. Recently, we have already seen a comparison of the Core i3-10100 with the Ryzen 3 3100 and Ryzen 3 3300X, and now on the Web, there is a more extensive test of the new Intel with the participation of a lot more CPU.
Core i3-10100 does not compete with the cheaper Ryzen 3 3100 and is inferior to the three-year Core i7-7700K
First, recall that the Core i3-10100 is a four-core processor with support for Hyper-Threading and frequencies of 3.6-4.3 GHz. Its recommended price is $ 122, that is, it is a direct competitor to the Ryzen 3 3300X. In addition, it is very interesting to compare the Core i3-10100 with the Core i7-7700K, which is very similar to the novelty in its parameters, but at one time was the flagship of the line, while the Core i3-10100 is the youngest model of the new generation of Core. In addition, it is interesting to look at the comparison of the new product with its predecessor in the face of Core i3-9100, which is deprived of Hyper-Threading support, but at the same time has the same four cores with almost the same frequencies.
So, let’s start by comparing the Core i3-10100 with the Core i3-9100F. The novelty is expected to be faster absolutely always, and, except for a couple of tests, the advantage of the new model is often either just significant or huge. But the Core i7-7700K, on the contrary, is always faster, but often the difference is uncritical. And this is very indicative from the point of view that slightly higher frequencies and an additional 2 MB of cache memory allow the processor three years ago to get ahead of the new product. This once again shows that no important architectural changes have occurred over the years.
As for the comparison with the latest AMD products, the Ryzen 3 3100 is always slightly faster than the Core i3-10100 with the exception of one test, where the processors show identical results. But the Ryzen 3 3300X is already significantly ahead of its direct competitor, while at the same time ahead of the Core i5-9600K, and sometimes even the Core i5-10600K, costing twice as much. But the Core i3-10100 consumes a little less power, although the difference is uncritical.
As for games, here the Core i3-10100 sometimes still bypasses the Ryzen 3 3300X, but even in fairly processor-dependent projects, the difference is often insignificant, although there are still exceptions. For example, in the Shadow of the Tomb Raider in Full HD, the Ryzen 3 3300X is ahead of the opponent by an impressive 23%, and the Ryzen 3 3100 is behind even more. On average, in Ryzen 3 games the 3300X outperforms the Core i3-10100 by 10%, and the Core i3-10100 outperforms the Ryzen 3 3100 by 6%.
