bit-tech.net

Intel Core i3-2100 Review

Comments 26 to 39 of 39

Reply
dicobalt 1st July 2011, 23:33 Quote
I love how Intel makes CPUs that focus on having a much higher instruction per clock than AMD. I think AMD wasted its time and money on the ATI deal and Fusion. AMD is banking on developers coding for its APU which is like when Intel bet that all developers would code for hyperthreading. Intel lost that bet and so will AMD with its APU. AMD should have focused their resources on making a faster CPU and struck a licensing agreement with ATI instead.
SuicideNeil 2nd July 2011, 03:51 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snips
@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.

Actually, 'AMD fan boi comments' was what the poster said he didn't see any of, not 'AMD comments'; big difference.

--------------

But meh, there are always new CPUs & GPUs / technologies appearing every year or two, I dont think anyone should get upset that their high end build from 18 months ago is now middle of the range at best compared to the latest components, 'tis the nature of the beast...
fluxtatic 2nd July 2011, 07:52 Quote
Speaking as an AMD fanboi, things have been looking depressing for AMD for a while. The best I can say now is that Intel procs have more power than the average person needs...but with better power management, even that argument carries less and less water.

Dear god, AMD, don't F up on Bulldozer...
Whirly 2nd July 2011, 17:02 Quote
Interesting review. Personally I would love to see Bit-Tech review the i3 2100T (35W TDP) coupled with an mATX motherboard.

I have a plan to make a very low power draw business PC out of one and I'd love to see a few real-world benchmarks on it. From what I've read so far it could produce a very capable (non-gaming) PC that draws <50w under full load and <10w at idle (where business PCs spend most of their time) using the integrated graphics.
MiNiMaL_FuSS 3rd July 2011, 00:31 Quote
Where's the overclocking?!?!
CAT-THE-FIFTH 3rd July 2011, 00:40 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by MiNiMaL_FuSS
Where's the overclocking?!?!

The Core i3 2100 lacks an unlocked multiplier meaning virtually no overclocking is possible.
CAT-THE-FIFTH 3rd July 2011, 01:17 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaiser
Hmmm this seems to bode well for the Sandy-bridge based Pentium G6xx and G8xx's... and badly for AMD.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aracos
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

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/pentium-g850-g840-g620_4.html#sect0

The Athlon II X3 455 is around £58:

http://www.scan.co.uk/products/amd-athlon-ii-x3-455-triple-core-rana-socket-am3-33ghz-15mb-cache-ht-4000mhz-95w-retail

The Pentium G840 is around £62:

http://www.scan.co.uk/products/intel-pentium-g840-socket-1155-dual-core-280ghz-3mb-smart-cache-gpu-850mhz-65w-retail
Snips 3rd July 2011, 19:40 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuicideNeil
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snips
@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.

Actually, 'AMD fan boi comments' was what the poster said he didn't see any of, not 'AMD comments'; big difference.

--------------

But meh, there are always new CPUs & GPUs / technologies appearing every year or two, I dont think anyone should get upset that their high end build from 18 months ago is now middle of the range at best compared to the latest components, 'tis the nature of the beast...

But then read the comments I gave as examples and its pretty clear who they are batting for in this INTEL topic.
keith_j_snyder2 14th July 2011, 05:07 Quote
First of all don't u think that u r bit late for posting a review of the same CPU? I mean LR has posted the review 6 months before u. But that's not the real problem as i believe "better late than never". The big thing is that after all this delay, u only benchmarked only 2 games i.e Crysis & X3 which are granny old games. I was expecting games like Bad Company 2, Crysis 2, Dirt 3, Metro etc. I mean it's not like u don't have other games but after all this time u only came up with 2 two titles?

My point is not to criticize u but i 'll appreciate if u to do benchmark one game & i.e BAD COMPANY 2 & preferably the multi-player part.
Mobeer 20th July 2011, 00:42 Quote
Rather than comparing to a Intel Core i7-990X Extreme Edition (4.6 Ghz) etc, it would have been more useful to compare to the other similar i3 processors (2120, 2105, 2100T), along with the similar Pentium G and rival Athlon processors.
oliver33 18th November 2011, 03:56 Quote
Noob here, with a silly question.

I've heard the i3 2100 processor is a good value bugdet chip, but everytime I google it looking for a laptop with it it's not 3.1GHz it's ~2.1GHz. If I search i3 2100 and 3.1GHz it only shows the processor by itself. Is it not to possible to get a laptop with an i3 sandy bridge @ 3.1GHz?
Noob? 18th November 2011, 11:56 Quote
This'll be making its way into a small build I've planned just around Christmas.
blackworx 27th March 2012, 19:52 Quote
When I go to read this review, it redirects to channelpro.co.uk. Definitely still looks like a BT review, but with all the page nav etc. belonging to another Dennis site. Something wrong with the SSS/CSS?
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