• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Core i3-10100 vs. Ryzen 3 3100 Featherweight 3DMark Showdown Surfaces

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
46,274 (7.69/day)
Location
Hyderabad, India
System Name RBMK-1000
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5700G
Motherboard ASUS ROG Strix B450-E Gaming
Cooling DeepCool Gammax L240 V2
Memory 2x 8GB G.Skill Sniper X
Video Card(s) Palit GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER GameRock
Storage Western Digital Black NVMe 512GB
Display(s) BenQ 1440p 60 Hz 27-inch
Case Corsair Carbide 100R
Audio Device(s) ASUS SupremeFX S1220A
Power Supply Cooler Master MWE Gold 650W
Mouse ASUS ROG Strix Impact
Keyboard Gamdias Hermes E2
Software Windows 11 Pro
AMD's timely announcement of the Ryzen 3 "Matisse" processor series could stir things up in the entry-level as Intel kitted its 10th generation Core i3 processors as 4-core/8-thread. Last week, a head-to-head Cinebench comparison between the i3-10300 and 3300X ensued, and today we have a 3DMark Firestrike and Time Spy comparison between their smaller siblings, the i3-10100 and the 3100, courtesy of Thai PC enthusiast TUM_APISAK. The two were benchmarked on Time Spy and Fire Strike on otherwise constant hardware: an RTX 2060 graphics card, 16 GB of memory, and a 1 TB Samsung 970 EVO SSD.

With Fire Strike, the 3100-powered machine leads in overall 3DMark score (by 0.31%), CPU-dependent Physics score (by 13.7%), and the Physics test. The i3-10100 is ahead by 1.4% in the Graphics score thanks to a 1.6% lead in graphics test 1, and 1.4% lead in graphics test 2. Over to the more advanced Time Spy test, which uses the DirectX 12 API that better leverages multi-core CPUs, we see the Ryzen 3 3100 post a 0.63% higher overall score, 1.5% higher CPU score; while the i3-10100 powered machines post within 1% higher graphics score. These numbers may suggest that the i3-10100 and the 3100 are within striking distance of each other and that either is a good pick for gamers, until you look at pricing. Intel's official pricing for the i3-10100 is $122 (per chip in 1,000-unit tray), whereas AMD lists the SEP price of the Ryzen 3 3100 at $99 (the Intel chip is at least 22% pricier), giving AMD a vast price-performance advantage that's hard to ignore, more so when you take into account value additions such as an unlocked multiplier and PCIe gen 4.0.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site
 
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
13,210 (3.83/day)
Location
Sunshine Coast
System Name Black Box
Processor Intel Xeon E3-1260L v5
Motherboard MSI E3 KRAIT Gaming v5
Cooling Tt tower + 120mm Tt fan
Memory G.Skill 16GB 3600 C18
Video Card(s) Asus GTX 970 Mini
Storage Kingston A2000 512Gb NVME
Display(s) AOC 24" Freesync 1m.s. 75Hz
Case Corsair 450D High Air Flow.
Audio Device(s) No need.
Power Supply FSP Aurum 650W
Mouse Yes
Keyboard Of course
Software W10 Pro 64 bit
"between the i3-10300 and 3300X " ?

Interestingly the 3100 boosted to 4.4GHz is shown in both comparisons so the number should only be used from the 3.6GHz run for a fair comparison.
 
Joined
Mar 10, 2015
Messages
3,984 (1.21/day)
System Name Wut?
Processor 3900X
Motherboard ASRock Taichi X570
Cooling Water
Memory 32GB GSkill CL16 3600mhz
Video Card(s) Vega 56
Storage 2 x AData XPG 8200 Pro 1TB
Display(s) 3440 x 1440
Case Thermaltake Tower 900
Power Supply Seasonic Prime Ultra Platinum
I am surprised that Intel has the graphics lead in this. That is what stands out the most to me.

"between the i3-10300 and 3300X " ?

Interestingly the 3100 boosted to 4.4GHz is shown in both comparisons so the number should only be used from the 3.6GHz run for a fair comparison.

I'm confused. Why is it fair to limit one when we are looking at total performance? If we were looking at per clock performance then I could see the limit.
 
Joined
Mar 10, 2015
Messages
3,984 (1.21/day)
System Name Wut?
Processor 3900X
Motherboard ASRock Taichi X570
Cooling Water
Memory 32GB GSkill CL16 3600mhz
Video Card(s) Vega 56
Storage 2 x AData XPG 8200 Pro 1TB
Display(s) 3440 x 1440
Case Thermaltake Tower 900
Power Supply Seasonic Prime Ultra Platinum
Wait, what? If by 'lead' you mean a fraction of a FPS in half of the tests, then you're spot on.

Is 1 > 2? I don't care how small, large, or indifferent the lead is, the number next to Intel's is larger. I am surprised because this is the one area AMD has always had a lead in. Usually sizeable too.
 
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
1,642 (0.49/day)
System Name Legion
Processor i7-12700KF
Motherboard Asus Z690-Plus TUF Gaming WiFi D5
Cooling Arctic Liquid Freezer 2 240mm AIO
Memory PNY MAKO DDR5-6000 C36-36-36-76
Video Card(s) PowerColor Hellhound 6700 XT 12GB
Storage WD SN770 512GB m.2, Samsung 980 Pro m.2 2TB
Display(s) Acer K272HUL 1440p / 34" MSI MAG341CQ 3440x1440
Case Montech Air X
Power Supply Corsair CX750M
Mouse Logitech MX Anywhere 25
Keyboard Logitech MX Keys
Software Lots
Is 1 > 2? I don't care how small, large, or indifferent the lead is, the number next to Intel's is larger. I am surprised because this is the one area AMD has always had a lead in. Usually sizeable too.

That's for iGPU. These tests show they are using an RTX 2060.

Naturally all these benchmarks need to be viewed with a healthy dose of skepticism. Not only could they be run with immature drivers, it's possible they are being run with engineering samples.

To illustrate, he has 4 Ryzen benchmarks that vary by 2.3% overall. This is more than the difference between the Ryzen and the Intel chip, and it's not explained here what if any tweaks were done for the different runs.

EDIT: Nevermind. Dude is overclocking the Ryzen. The 3100 is only rated for 3.9Ghz turbo and he has it running at 4.4Ghz. What a bogus comparison.

I would really like to see these 4C\8T i3's thrown up against old school i7's - like the 4790, 6700, 7700, and 8700 (non K models).
 
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
5,398 (0.92/day)
Location
Australia
System Name Night Rider | Mini LAN PC | Workhorse
Processor AMD R7 5800X3D | Ryzen 1600X | i7 970
Motherboard MSi AM4 Pro Carbon | GA- | Gigabyte EX58-UD5
Cooling Noctua U9S Twin Fan| Stock Cooler, Copper Core)| Big shairkan B
Memory 2x8GB DDR4 G.Skill Ripjaws 3600MHz| 2x8GB Corsair 3000 | 6x2GB DDR3 1300 Corsair
Video Card(s) MSI AMD 6750XT | 6500XT | MSI RX 580 8GB
Storage 1TB WD Black NVME / 250GB SSD /2TB WD Black | 500GB SSD WD, 2x1TB, 1x750 | WD 500 SSD/Seagate 320
Display(s) LG 27" 1440P| Samsung 20" S20C300L/DELL 15" | 22" DELL/19"DELL
Case LIAN LI PC-18 | Mini ATX Case (custom) | Atrix C4 9001
Audio Device(s) Onboard | Onbaord | Onboard
Power Supply Silverstone 850 | Silverstone Mini 450W | Corsair CX-750
Mouse Coolermaster Pro | Rapoo V900 | Gigabyte 6850X
Keyboard MAX Keyboard Nighthawk X8 | Creative Fatal1ty eluminx | Some POS Logitech
Software Windows 10 Pro 64 | Windows 10 Pro 64 | Windows 7 Pro 64/Windows 10 Home
its all within margin of error, so to me its all basically a tie, it needs to be at least 5% difference or above to be called "faster" or "better" or a clear winner in my eyes.

Fact is your getting the same performance for a better price and platform on the AMD, cool!
 
Joined
May 30, 2015
Messages
1,865 (0.58/day)
Location
Seattle, WA
I am surprised that Intel has the graphics lead in this. That is what stands out the most to me.

Within margin for error. Rerun the test 10 times and you get more variance in results than that from a single hardware config. 3DMark's error variance is over 2% on a single platform.
 
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
13,210 (3.83/day)
Location
Sunshine Coast
System Name Black Box
Processor Intel Xeon E3-1260L v5
Motherboard MSI E3 KRAIT Gaming v5
Cooling Tt tower + 120mm Tt fan
Memory G.Skill 16GB 3600 C18
Video Card(s) Asus GTX 970 Mini
Storage Kingston A2000 512Gb NVME
Display(s) AOC 24" Freesync 1m.s. 75Hz
Case Corsair 450D High Air Flow.
Audio Device(s) No need.
Power Supply FSP Aurum 650W
Mouse Yes
Keyboard Of course
Software W10 Pro 64 bit
I'm confused. Why is it fair to limit one when we are looking at total performance? If we were looking at per clock performance then I could see the limit.
Off the shelf performance should be compared, not one overclocked and not the other.
 
Joined
Mar 28, 2020
Messages
1,632 (1.12/day)
EDIT: Nevermind. Dude is overclocking the Ryzen. The 3100 is only rated for 3.9Ghz turbo and he has it running at 4.4Ghz. What a bogus comparison.

I would really like to see these 4C\8T i3's thrown up against old school i7's - like the 4790, 6700, 7700, and 8700 (non K models).

I don't deny that they should be comparing at stock, but considering that Intel deliberately lock their CPU from overclocking actually gave them a disadvantage here. The cheaper Ryzen 3 while slower at stock can get a good boost in performance through an overclock. Also, I am doubtful that the Intel processor can maintain its boost clock for long with the included stock cooler. If review uses the respective stock coolers, Intel chips will not be able to perform well since it will be going well above the 65W TDP at its >4Ghz clockspeed.

Also I see no point comparing this with the older 6xxx, 7xxx and 8xxx series. They are basically the same architecture. The Comet Lake is just a version on steroids (higher clock due to higher power consumption).
 
Joined
Mar 10, 2015
Messages
3,984 (1.21/day)
System Name Wut?
Processor 3900X
Motherboard ASRock Taichi X570
Cooling Water
Memory 32GB GSkill CL16 3600mhz
Video Card(s) Vega 56
Storage 2 x AData XPG 8200 Pro 1TB
Display(s) 3440 x 1440
Case Thermaltake Tower 900
Power Supply Seasonic Prime Ultra Platinum
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
1,642 (0.49/day)
System Name Legion
Processor i7-12700KF
Motherboard Asus Z690-Plus TUF Gaming WiFi D5
Cooling Arctic Liquid Freezer 2 240mm AIO
Memory PNY MAKO DDR5-6000 C36-36-36-76
Video Card(s) PowerColor Hellhound 6700 XT 12GB
Storage WD SN770 512GB m.2, Samsung 980 Pro m.2 2TB
Display(s) Acer K272HUL 1440p / 34" MSI MAG341CQ 3440x1440
Case Montech Air X
Power Supply Corsair CX750M
Mouse Logitech MX Anywhere 25
Keyboard Logitech MX Keys
Software Lots
I don't deny that they should be comparing at stock, but considering that Intel deliberately lock their CPU from overclocking actually gave them a disadvantage here. The cheaper Ryzen 3 while slower at stock can get a good boost in performance through an overclock. Also, I am doubtful that the Intel processor can maintain its boost clock for long with the included stock cooler. If review uses the respective stock coolers, Intel chips will not be able to perform well since it will be going well above the 65W TDP at its >4Ghz clockspeed.

Most chips in general are never overclocked, and in particular chips in this range are not going to be overclocked. Go to any store and you'll find gobs of i5-9400 based pre-builts. This type of comparison is very misleading. It is, frankly, garbage.

And, while your statement about overclocking the Intel CPU itself being disabled is true, it is possible to significantly overclock the memory. So again, this is all apples to oranges false comparisons.

Also I see no point comparing this with the older 6xxx, 7xxx and 8xxx series. They are basically the same architecture. The Comet Lake is just a version on steroids (higher clock due to higher power consumption).

I always prefer actual results to assumption, assumptions are usually only as accurate as the objectivity of the person making the assumptions - and humans are not very objective.

There is already a comparison of the i5-10400 to an i7-9700F (8 core) out there which was fascinating. Specifically, the 6c/12t i5-10400 spanks the 8c/8t 9700 in WinRar and some of the 3dMark physics tests.
 
Joined
Sep 6, 2013
Messages
2,973 (0.77/day)
Location
Athens, Greece
System Name 3 desktop systems: Gaming / Internet / HTPC
Processor Ryzen 5 5500 / Ryzen 5 4600G / FX 6300 (12 years latter got to see how bad Bulldozer is)
Motherboard MSI X470 Gaming Plus Max (1) / MSI X470 Gaming Plus Max (2) / Gigabyte GA-990XA-UD3
Cooling Νoctua U12S / Segotep T4 / Snowman M-T6
Memory 16GB G.Skill RIPJAWS 3600 / 16GB G.Skill Aegis 3200 / 16GB Kingston 2400MHz (DDR3)
Video Card(s) ASRock RX 6600 + GT 710 (PhysX)/ Vega 7 integrated / Radeon RX 580
Storage NVMes, NVMes everywhere / NVMes, more NVMes / Various storage, SATA SSD mostly
Display(s) Philips 43PUS8857/12 UHD TV (120Hz, HDR, FreeSync Premium) ---- 19'' HP monitor + BlitzWolf BW-V5
Case Sharkoon Rebel 12 / Sharkoon Rebel 9 / Xigmatek Midguard
Audio Device(s) onboard
Power Supply Chieftec 850W / Silver Power 400W / Sharkoon 650W
Mouse CoolerMaster Devastator III Plus / Coolermaster Devastator / Logitech
Keyboard CoolerMaster Devastator III Plus / Coolermaster Devastator / Logitech
Software Windows 10 / Windows 10 / Windows 7
Joined
Jun 27, 2016
Messages
290 (0.10/day)
System Name MacBook Pro 16"
Processor M1 Pro
Memory 16GB unified memory
Storage 1 TB
Synthetic test aren't good indicator and basically they don't mean much. Especially for thing unreleased those result mean nothing at all.
 
Joined
Jul 10, 2017
Messages
2,671 (1.09/day)
Within margin for error. Rerun the test 10 times and you get more variance in results than that from a single hardware config. 3DMark's error variance is over 2% on a single platform.
Yes, look how people are drooling over some 'benchmarks', while real world numbers are all that matter.
 
Top