bit-tech.net

Intel Core i3-2100 Review

Comments 1 to 25 of 39

Reply
kaiser 1st July 2011, 09:43 Quote
Hmmm this seems to bode well for the Sandy-bridge based Pentium G6xx and G8xx's... and badly for AMD.
sandys 1st July 2011, 10:02 Quote
gmost US sites put this up against llano as it's in the same price ballpark and the AMD betters it generally. Sure mostly due to the gpu, but low end chips like that will generally rely on the gpu.
do_it_anyway 1st July 2011, 10:33 Quote
I hate the lack of overclocking, and would struggle to recommend it to someone who is self building.
For just £20 more you can have a CPU that has at least turbo-boost that can be tweaked to get more performance out of it.
Aracos 1st July 2011, 11:23 Quote
I was hoping to see a comparison to the Phenom II X4 955, it's direct competitor in terms of price since they're exactly the same price on scan right now.
Combatus 1st July 2011, 11:44 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by storm20200
I was hoping to see a comparison to the Phenom II X4 955, it's direct competitor in terms of price since they're exactly the same price on scan right now.

We included the Phenom II X4 980 BE which is a superior CPU - I think the results speak for themselves...
enikmaster 1st July 2011, 11:56 Quote
so, yesterday I've read your review about the new A8-3850 and you guys compare it to this i3 processor. Why didn't you use the same games on both reviews? Why don't show that this i3 is a lot worse in some other games? you could say that this one performed well in Crysis but awfully in Leaf4Dead. on the other side I would like to know who did the AMD CPU performed in Crysis and X3: Terran Conflit, just to compare...
You're better than this... ;)
Snips 1st July 2011, 12:07 Quote
lol another Intel review and the AMD fanbois are out crying foul.
Combatus 1st July 2011, 12:22 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by enikmaster
so, yesterday I've read your review about the new A8-3850 and you guys compare it to this i3 processor. Why didn't you use the same games on both reviews? Why don't show that this i3 is a lot worse in some other games? you could say that this one performed well in Crysis but awfully in Leaf4Dead. on the other side I would like to know who did the AMD CPU performed in Crysis and X3: Terran Conflit, just to compare...
You're better than this... ;)


We didn't use the same games because we used a P67 board to test the Core i3-2100 here, as we do with all Sandy Bridge CPUs. As such we weren't able to access its integrated processor graphics unit so we used our normal suit of games and test kit. The A8-3850 is first and foremost an APU so we use a different test suit which includes less demanding games.

The 3850 is never going to outperform a quad-core Phenom, or run Arma II at reasonable settings at playable frame rates though. As such the 2100, which did manage to outpace a Phenom II X4 980 BE in several tests, is more interesting when paired with a discrete GPU. After all, we already know that the 2100's graphics chip isn't up to much.
fingerbob69 1st July 2011, 12:22 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snips
lol another Intel review and the AMD fanbois are out crying foul.

It's not crying foul ...yesterday the A8 got compared to this; up in some tests down in others.

Today, this i3 gets a free ride without a llano in sight.

"Something rotten in the state of Denmark?"
Snips 1st July 2011, 12:25 Quote
"Foul! Foul!" I hear them say
Combatus 1st July 2011, 12:49 Quote
TBH, Llano's main selling point is it's integrated processor graphics unit, which is clearly far superior to the one included with the i3-2100 - AMD should be applauded for this. However, using a discrete graphics card, the i3-2100 was faster than a 3.7GHz Phenom II X4 in all our game tests - significantly so - which in turn is a superior CPU to the A8-3850. The A8-3850 simply isn't able to compete in a discrete graphics environment - even AMD told use they expect few users to pair Llano CPUs with discrete graphics cards.
S1W1 1st July 2011, 12:50 Quote
The £89 entry level dual core beats the AMD X6 1090T hexacore I bought 7 months ago for £180 :( I knew I should have waited the extra month for Sandy Bridge :D
sandys 1st July 2011, 13:12 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by S1W1
The £89 entry level dual core beats the AMD X6 1090T hexacore I bought 7 months ago for £180 :( I knew I should have waited the extra month for Sandy Bridge :D

Indeed, I'm looking to upgrade my x4 9950 and was just going to pop an x6 in thinking it was a cheap an worthwhile option, now i am wondering whether to switch platforms even though it does mean all new memory....whats the cheapest Intel SLi board I wonder?
Acanuck 1st July 2011, 13:59 Quote
Reading through the comments, I can't find a single AMD "fanboi" comment, Snips.
The only times you seem to make an appearence on the comments is to start arguments between "fanbois". It's just not necessary if you ask me.
D B 1st July 2011, 14:30 Quote
Just wondering what this CPU is targeted at ?
I would think small laptop/netbooks with no dedicated GPU , and I wish that the tests would have included one with on chip graphics
Spreadie 1st July 2011, 14:46 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acanuck
Reading through the comments, I can't find a single AMD "fanboi" comment, Snips.
The only times you seem to make an appearence on the comments is to start arguments between "fanbois". It's just not necessary if you ask me.
Don't feed the trolls mate. It's best to ignore them.
Acanuck 1st July 2011, 14:54 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spreadie
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acanuck
Reading through the comments, I can't find a single AMD "fanboi" comment, Snips.
The only times you seem to make an appearence on the comments is to start arguments between "fanbois". It's just not necessary if you ask me.
Don't feed the trolls mate. It's best to ignore them.

You're absolutely right. It's what I usually do.
azazel1024 1st July 2011, 15:16 Quote
The i3-2100? Deffinitely not netbooks and laptops. It is a desktop part, not a LV let alone CULV part. This is targeted at entry level desktop buyers who would be looking at an Intel desktop.

At around $120-130 US, plus a motherboard, case, low end discrete GPU, etc you have a system probably running in the $450-600 price range with monitor (again, an entry level probably 20" monitor) that performs pretty well, but not spectacularly. Think Llano competitor, but maybe $50-100 more and more powerful at that. Llano really seems to be targeted at the entry level buyer and maybe HTPC, which TBH it seems to be able to do pretty well (and also low end and even in to the midgrade laptop range). Bulldozer looks to be targeted at the midrange of the buyer market, though I think AMD would claim the high end. (the architecture revisions just don't look like it'll do that and AMD seems to be claiming its higher end bulldozer parts, octocore are going to be able to take on SB 2500k and maybe even 2600k...Intels stated midrange champions...that doesn't include any upcoming Intel SB-E parts, like their Hexacore and possible future octocore parts, which means it takes nearly or even twice as many cores for the same multithreaded performance).

So AMD deffinitely had a place in the right machine, and a lot of computers ship in the entry level market, just like dSLR cameras, more people by entry level dSLRs (or for that matter point and shoots) than they do prosumer or pro dSLRs...however margines are much smaller in the very entry level of the market, the mid level of the market is the real king in most industries.
TaRkA DaHl 1st July 2011, 16:10 Quote
Did anyone check the PPD in F@H by chance?
javaman 1st July 2011, 16:32 Quote
Any idea when notebooks with fusion processors will appear too? Even Exxx stuff is golddust
Snips 1st July 2011, 17:05 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acanuck
Reading through the comments, I can't find a single AMD "fanboi" comment, Snips.
The only times you seem to make an appearence on the comments is to start arguments between "fanbois". It's just not necessary if you ask me.

Really? you saw no topic mentioning AMD products?

"gmost US sites put this up against llano as it's in the same price ballpark and the AMD betters it generally"

"so, yesterday I've read your review about the new A8-3850 and you guys compare it to this i3 processor. Why didn't you use the same games on both reviews? Why don't show that this i3 is a lot worse in some other games? you could say that this one performed well in Crysis but awfully in Leaf4Dead. on the other side I would like to know who did the AMD CPU performed in Crysis and X3: Terran Conflit, just to compare...
You're better than this... ;)"



"I was hoping to see a comparison to the Phenom II X4 955, it's direct competitor in terms of price since they're exactly the same price on scan right now."

"It's not crying foul ...yesterday the A8 got compared to this; up in some tests down in others.

Today, this i3 gets a free ride without a llano in sight.

"Something rotten in the state of Denmark?" "

To quote a few, Yeah I couldn't see any reference to AMD either.
Aracos 1st July 2011, 18:42 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Combatus
Quote:
Originally Posted by storm20200
I was hoping to see a comparison to the Phenom II X4 955, it's direct competitor in terms of price since they're exactly the same price on scan right now.

We included the Phenom II X4 980 BE which is a superior CPU - I think the results speak for themselves...

I know you did, but it's also £43 more which is almost 50% more. AKA not a very direct competitor.

EDIT: Let me correct myself, it is £54.60.

EDIT: Also I'm not really compaining, more just suggesting it be put again something that costs the same or close to it. AKA I want to see a a Pentium G620 pitted against a Phenom II X2 not again something more more expensive than it :P
enikmaster 1st July 2011, 19:03 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snips
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acanuck
Reading through the comments, I can't find a single AMD "fanboi" comment, Snips.
The only times you seem to make an appearence on the comments is to start arguments between "fanbois". It's just not necessary if you ask me.

Really? you saw no topic mentioning AMD products?

"so, yesterday I've read your review about the new A8-3850 and you guys compare it to this i3 processor. Why didn't you use the same games on both reviews? Why don't show that this i3 is a lot worse in some other games? you could say that this one performed well in Crysis but awfully in Leaf4Dead. on the other side I would like to know who did the AMD CPU performed in Crysis and X3: Terran Conflit, just to compare...
You're better than this... ;)"


To quote a few, Yeah I couldn't see any reference to AMD either.

I just wanted to understand why they do that, and they explained it. I'm no fanboy, I eve have an Intel Q6600 CPU...
Snips 1st July 2011, 20:34 Quote
@enikmaster please dont take it personally. The other dude was saying no one mentioned AMD. You were one of many who did.

I had a Q6600 as well.
improprietary 1st July 2011, 22:11 Quote
how is the i3 better than a pentium chip in the same socket?
Wouldn't it be cheaper and you'd get the same amount of horsepower somewhat?
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums