Thursday, December 2nd 2021

Intel's Entry-level Core i3-12100 "Alder Lake" Beats Ryzen 3 3300X Comfortably

Intel's next entry-level processor for the Socket LGA1700 platform is the Core i3-12100. Carved out of the "Alder Lake-S" H0 silicon, this processor features 4 "Golden Cove" performance cores with HyperThreading enabling 8 logical processors, and no E-cores. The processor ticks at 3.30 GHz, with 4.30 GHz Turbo Boost 2.0 frequency. Each of the four cores has 1.25 MB of L2 cache, and they share 12 MB of L3 cache. The i3-12100 gets a Gen12 Xe LP-based iGPU, while a variant of the processor, the i3-12100F, lacks integrated graphics. Intel is rating the processor base power value at 60 W, with 77 W maximum turbo power.

XFastest scored an i3-12100 engineering sample, and wasted no time in comparing it with the Ryzen 3 3300X. The i3-12100 was tested on an ASRock Z690 Steel Legend motherboard that has DDR4 memory slots. 16 GB of dual-channel DDR4-3600 memory and RTX 3060 Ti were used on both the Intel and AMD test-beds. A Ryzen 3 3100 was also used on the AMD side. Right off the bat, we see the i3-12100 take a significant lead over the AMD chips at PCMark, posting a roughly 15% performance lead. Cinebench R23 is another test where the little "Alder Lake" scores big, posting a roughly 26% performance lead in the multi-threaded test, and 27% in the single-threaded test. This is mainly because the 3300X is based on "Zen 2" while the i3-12100 uses the cutting-edge "Golden Cove" cores. AMD hasn't bothered with "Zen 3" based Ryzen 3 desktop processors in the retail market.
PugetBench for Adobe Premiere Pro is where the i3-12100 smokes the AMD parts, posting a roughly 50% export performance lead. With Counter Stike: Global Offensive, where the i3-12100 posts 8.5% higher frame-rates on account of its higher IPC. This should make the i3-12100 (and the subsequent i3-12100F) some formidable chips for e-sports or mainstream gaming. The i3-12100 ends up doing all this being a fairly hot chip, as tested in the AIDA64 temperature stress.
Intel is expected to launch the Core i3-12100 in Q1 2022.
Sources: XFastest, Komachi_Ensaka, VideoCardz
Add your own comment

90 Comments on Intel's Entry-level Core i3-12100 "Alder Lake" Beats Ryzen 3 3300X Comfortably

#1
Selaya
About time we're getting a better quadcore.
Posted on Reply
#2
DBGT
After 1.5 year.
Posted on Reply
#4
Arumio
how much is the fish?
Posted on Reply
#5
Crackong
By the time this 12100 actually coming out and, with budget MB actually available, The 3300x would be a 2 year-old processor.
Great victory intel, Comfortably ?

Posted on Reply
#6
Patriot
CrackongBy the time this 12100 actually coming out and, with budget MB actually available, The 3300x would be a 2 year-old processor.
Great victory intel, Comfortably ?

Id fucking hope so, was my first thought...
Comparison should be the OEM 5300g imo.
Posted on Reply
#7
Tsukiyomi91
I mean, a gain is a gain, I guess. Until AMD releases an "Alder Lake" killer, Intel is gonna sweep up the budget section of the PC market. And with how some countries where the current gen Ryzen CPUs did not get any price cut or availability, Intel seems like the better option.
Posted on Reply
#8
Karti
CrackongBy the time this 12100 actually coming out and, with budget MB actually available, The 3300x would be a 2 year-old processor.
Great victory intel, Comfortably ?

Wow, the AMD schills are more and more showing how they ignore the facts....

Why i3-12100 is compared to R3 3300X? Maybe because this is still the best 4C/8T "budget" CPU that AMD ever released into the public - even when it was a paper launch that existed for like 3-4 months.
Why not R3 5300G? Well, because R3 3300X beats - to the pulp - 5300G.... only benefit of "latest R3" cpu, is that is has a iGPU - nothing else.

What Intel should compare their cpu against? When AMD literaly pisses on the low end / low budget community..
With your way of thinking, i5-12400/126000 ETC should not be compared to R5-5600X. Why? Because 5600X is already "a year old" - then blame AMD for pissing on their community, not Intel.

And here is small add from me.
Ironic how AMD schills claim that "These tests have no standing cuz the cpu is older" - yet, the same people, have no single issue when AMD is doing that...

IRONIC - right?
Posted on Reply
#9
Karti
PatriotId fucking hope so, was my first thought...
Comparison should be the OEM 5300g imo.
soo compare a OEM cpu to a standard market one.. ok

also here is a funny note you guys ignores - R3 5300G, is WEAKER than R3 3300X - only benefit it has, is a iGPU... nothing else
Posted on Reply
#10
Selaya
Intel's already swept up the budget section of the PC market, news flash.
There's stuff like 10100, 11400 while the last budget AMD's ... the 3400G? (which is total ass by today's standards.) The 3300X doesn't count as it's got no IGP and is unobtainium on top just because. 3600s have like doubled in price.

And neither Vermeer nor Cezanne has had any budget offerings.
Posted on Reply
#11
Crackong
PatriotId fucking hope so, was my first thought...
Comparison should be the OEM 5300g imo.
The 5300g isn't much better than the 3300x in the CPU side because the default clock speed is 100MHz lower.

But yeah
If the 5300g had a retail package and overclockable.
Posted on Reply
#12
TheGuruStud
SelayaIntel's already swept up the budget section of the PC market, news flash.
There's stuff like 10100, 11400 while the last budget AMD's ... the 3400G? (which is total ass by today's standards.) The 3300X doesn't count as it's got no IGP and is unobtainium on top just because. 3600s have like doubled in price.

And neither Vermeer nor Cezanne has had any budget offerings.
And still no one is buying them LOL
Posted on Reply
#13
ratirt
Why not get the 5600g? These are available at least where I live.
Posted on Reply
#14
Patriot
ratirtWhy not get the 5600g? These are available at least where I live.
I would assume these are dropping in the 80-150 range where the 3300x resided. 5600g is just now discounted to 219 at microcenter and launched at 259.
Posted on Reply
#15
ratirt
PatriotI would assume these are dropping in the 80-150 range where the 3300x resided. 5600g is just now discounted to 219 at microcenter and launched at 259.
Sure but these are not available and the 5600g is much faster with dGPU and iGPU nonetheless and obviously costs a bit more but you pay more and get more and these are available. It's not like you pay way more for an equivalent product in performance. It's just something to consider when aiming for a product of that sort.
Posted on Reply
#16
napata
CrackongBy the time this 12100 actually coming out and, with budget MB actually available, The 3300x would be a 2 year-old processor.
Great victory intel, Comfortably ?

The 3300x was pretty much a fake product though. Outside of some launch shipments it didn't exist. I remember people wanting to buy one for months with it never coming into stock.
Posted on Reply
#18
Karti
ratirtWhy not get the 5600g? These are available at least where I live.
why you want to compare a 4C/8T to 6C/12T?

and why not to 5300G? because 5300G is actualy weaker than 3300X
Posted on Reply
#19
Caring1
But benchmarks aren't important Intel.
Posted on Reply
#20
Prima.Vera
Lol. This quad core beats the hell out of my ancient i7-3770K CPU :laugh::laugh::laugh:
Posted on Reply
#21
ratirt
Kartiwhy you want to compare a 4C/8T to 6C/12T?

and why not to 5300G? because 5300G is actualy weaker than 3300X
Dude I'm not comparing anything I'm saying this one is available for a bit more and it is also way faster.
Why not 5300g? Simple, these are not available for purchase. Besides the 5300g is equivalent to 3300x in terms of gaming and productivity with minor differences here and there. Literally the same performance but none of those is available
Posted on Reply
#22
Crackong
KartiWow, the AMD schills are more and more showing how they ignore the facts....

Why i3-12100 is compared to R3 3300X? Maybe because this is still the best 4C/8T "budget" CPU that AMD ever released into the public - even when it was a paper launch that existed for like 3-4 months.
Why not R3 5300G? Well, because R3 3300X beats - to the pulp - 5300G.... only benefit of "latest R3" cpu, is that is has a iGPU - nothing else.

What Intel should compare their cpu against? When AMD literaly pisses on the low end / low budget community..
With your way of thinking, i5-12400/126000 ETC should not be compared to R5-5600X. Why? Because 5600X is already "a year old" - then blame AMD for pissing on their community, not Intel.

And here is small add from me.
Ironic how AMD schills claim that "These tests have no standing cuz the cpu is older" - yet, the same people, have no single issue when AMD is doing that...

IRONIC - right?
Ironic you mean the whole pointless 11th gen from Intel ?
That thing really have no standing against the "older" (whatever you wanna called it) AMD CPUs

The fact is, 12100 is faster than 3300x.
The fact is, 3300x is a 2 year-old product by that time.

Both are facts
You are just overreacted.

When you called someone a shill, you have one finger pointing to someone with THREE fingers pointing yourselves my friend.
napataThe 3300x was pretty much a fake product though. Outside of some launch shipments it didn't exist. I remember people wanting to buy one for months with it never coming into stock.
Yea I was trying to get one back in 2020, but no stock so I'd end up getting a 3500x, which is the same price locally.
Posted on Reply
#24
ViperXTR
eh, i got one of them 3300X last year, decent availability, at least that time, but sold it after a few months, got a buyer after i posted it 10min online
Posted on Reply
#25
AnarchoPrimitiv
KartiAnd here is small add from me.
Ironic how AMD schills claim that "These tests have no standing cuz the cpu is older" - yet, the same people, have no single issue when AMD is doing that...

IRONIC - right?
Is it ever valid to engage in the logical fallacy of whataboutism? Somebody else's behavior is never a defense for your own.

On another note, it IS worth pointing out that this Alder lake chip is being compared to 2.5 year old technology because ANY comparison should be given proper context.... It's like how I point out that Intel has an R&D budget 650% greater than AMD's and an annual revenue 800% greater than AMD's to demonstrate how when taken in context, Alder lake's average performance gain over a 1.5 year old Zen 3 architecture is not that impressive considering Intel literally has a magnitude greater amount of financial resources to invest and financial reality is the primary factor in determining these outcomes. It makes it all that more impressive what AMD has accomplished considering their shoestring budget by comparison. I challenge anyone to find another example from any other industry where a company the size of AMD with it's small amount of financial resources compared to Intel, has been able to beat a competitor the size of Intel for several years and still manages to stay competitive with 1.5 year old products despite the completely uneven playing field.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment