Monday, December 27th 2021
Intel Core i3-12100 and i3-12300 "Alder Lake" Quad-Core Chips Tested
Intel's upcoming Core i3-12100 and i3-12300 quad-core processors that form the value-end of the 12th Gen Core "Alder Lake-S" desktop processor family, pack an incredible mix of performance for their segment, which puts them ahead of six-core parts from the previous-generation, according to performance testing on the ChipHell forums. The two chips are based on the "H0" silicon, and feature four "Golden Cove" P-cores with HyperThreading enabled; no E-cores, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. From what we can tell, the i3-12100 and i3-12300 are segment only by a 100 MHz maximum boost frequency value, and possibly at the iGPU-level.
Among the tests run by ChipHell are Cinebench R20, Cinebench R23, CPU-Z bench, CS:GO; and power/thermal testing using AIDA64. Right off the bat, we see the two chips flex their high IPC in the CPU-Z bench, scoring 687 points (i3-12100), and 702.5 points (i3-12300). An AMD "Zen 3" based quad-core chip, such as the OEM-only Ryzen 3 PRO 5350G, should score roughly 620 points, while the slowest "Rocket Lake" part, the i5-11400, only does 566 points. The multi-threaded test sees scores ranging between 3407 to 3482 points for the two.CB R20 and R23 see the i3-12100 and i3-12300 top the performance charts in comparison to the Ryzen 3 5350G, posting 21-25% higher single-threaded scores in CB R20; and 22-25% in CB R23 single-thread. Both chips offer proportionately high multi-threaded performance compared to the 5350G. The i3-12300 ends up 17% slower in multi-threaded CB R23 than the six-core i5-11400, and 28% slower than the 5600G. Find these results and more, in the source links below.
Sources:
VideoCardz, ChipHell, 3DCenter.org, WCCFTech
Among the tests run by ChipHell are Cinebench R20, Cinebench R23, CPU-Z bench, CS:GO; and power/thermal testing using AIDA64. Right off the bat, we see the two chips flex their high IPC in the CPU-Z bench, scoring 687 points (i3-12100), and 702.5 points (i3-12300). An AMD "Zen 3" based quad-core chip, such as the OEM-only Ryzen 3 PRO 5350G, should score roughly 620 points, while the slowest "Rocket Lake" part, the i5-11400, only does 566 points. The multi-threaded test sees scores ranging between 3407 to 3482 points for the two.CB R20 and R23 see the i3-12100 and i3-12300 top the performance charts in comparison to the Ryzen 3 5350G, posting 21-25% higher single-threaded scores in CB R20; and 22-25% in CB R23 single-thread. Both chips offer proportionately high multi-threaded performance compared to the 5350G. The i3-12300 ends up 17% slower in multi-threaded CB R23 than the six-core i5-11400, and 28% slower than the 5600G. Find these results and more, in the source links below.
97 Comments on Intel Core i3-12100 and i3-12300 "Alder Lake" Quad-Core Chips Tested
That's what i have been saying!
I think AMD will re assess cpu pricing once Alderlake non k are released ! You want AMD to have good products, then you will pay. That's the way Intel operate and any company with good products the same . AMD were always budget cos they were no where near as good as Intel until the last couple of years. The hard part is to stay competitive!
As for gpus, Intel will charge accordingly to their competition. There will be no big discounts! I think you are right on the money !
I still am puzzled why people compare the price for 12400f to a 5600x. It's mind boggling to me.
www.amazon.com/dp/B08166SLDF
AMD Ryzen 5 5600X $290.74
www.newegg.com/intel-core-i5-11400f-core-i5-11th-gen/p/N82E16819118264
Intel Core i5-11400F $182.95
www.newegg.com/p/N82E16813144396
MSI MAG B560M BAZOOKA $99.99
www.msi.com/Motherboard/MAG-B560M-BAZOOKA
When you say performs very close or faster, what do you have in mind games?
12400f will be faster than a 5600x. It is obvious Intel has advanced CPUs. 5600x is not the lowest tier of the CPUs like the 12400f is. What I'm point out is, there are cheaper CPUs from AMD in the same price range. As mentioned 5600g is in the same price range for instance. There are cheaper AMD CPUs there.www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-5600G-12-Thread-Processor/dp/B092L9GF5N/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=5600g&qid=1640765385&sr=8-1
The 11400f is not available. out of stock and I thought we are talking about 12400f
For apps: Intel Core i5-12400 Workstation Review - How does real work succeed without glued-on E-cores? | Part 2 | Page 5 | igor'sLAB (igorslab.de) they are very simliar, but 12400F is more efficient.
12400F however is superior in powerefficiency both in gaming and apps, if the leaked price of 190usd is right then the 5600X should not cost more than 200usd if they are to compete considering MB-price of B660 probably will be a bit higher than for B550.
If we look at prices alone then the Ryzen 3600 is the competition for the 12400F, and it fails big time.
For bare min gaming
Intel have an advantage here in a sense they own their own fab, so they can control supply and pricing better than the likes of fabless companies like AMD. I suspect if yields for the lower and mid end processors are good, those i3 models may be hard to come by. No point wasting good dies and sell them cheaper than an i5 that costs more.
Price versus performance is the main way you can really compare products ! Atm Intel are essentially underpricing AMD but the new cpus are actually more cores with newer and hybrid architecture.
Kinda like AMD have been doing for last few years with the 12 and 16 core versions.
But price /performance is how you would buy stuff ! But you do need to take into account total system cost .
Next 12 months will be very interesting !
With the power efficiency I would withhold my opinion for the release and more reviews. I've seen the 12600K being basically on par with 5600x in terms of efficiency. It is hard for me to believe that the 12400f is efficient highly over 5600x or 5600g.
The 5600x is a different CPU with more cores than a 12400k or f and thus it will cost more and also it has been released way back. Price cuts for the 5000 series? Oh boy yeah :D Although I got mine already.
3600 is an already old architecture. You can compare everything but remember, you are comparing an old to a brand new which Intel has released to tackle the 5000 series CPUs from AMD. I'm sure, AMD will release new CPU to tackle 12000 series Intel's processors. This is how it works, the companies are trying to surpass each other with new products. Some people make it sound, like if AMD should not release 5000 series CPUs because Alder Lake CPUs are better. 5000 series CPUs have been with us for a while now so maybe lets wait for AMD's response and mean time compare CPUs, according to a segment they belong in.
I'm sure once supply/demand balance out again we'll see budget options from AMD again but you have to remember that chasing the high-end for big profits in a small market share almost killed Apple in the early 00's No need to be puzzled. A 12400F has been shown to compete with a 5800X in single-threaded and gaming workloads, whilst comfortably beating a 5600X in multi-threaded workloads.
Comparisons with the 5800X and 5600X are therefore the most obvious ones to make.
There's nothing invalid about comparing a 12400F to a 5600G either, but you're suddenly removing like-for-like comparisons which makes the comparison less relevant. The 5600G has an IGP and less L3 cache, which hurts its performance and the reduced cache + IGP makes it unlike the 5600X/5800X/12400F both in how its performance scales and also which market sector its targeting; If you have a dGPU you probably wouldn't look at the 5600G because it sacrifices cache and performance for an IGP you don't need and likewise if you have no dGPU you're unlikely to be looking at the 5600X/5800X/12400F since then you have an incomplete system that won't boot.
Pentium G6405 1050 rp
Athlon 3000G: 1300 rp
10105F: 1200
10400F: 2025
11600K: 3900
Ryzen 5600G: 3900
12600K: 4700
GT 1030 GDDR5 (cheapest new card): 1900.
So compared to the 10400F + GT 1030 the 5600G is a better CPU and similar graphics, and cheaper, and compared to the 11600K it's about the same, the same price and much better IGP. Compare to the 12600K it's cheaper, loses on performance which is fair but still GPU is expensive.
And of course with cheaper motherboards the 3000G 's a far better gaming solution for basic games than the Pentium and the cost works out about the same.
With the total overpricing of all GPUs and the dreadful performance of Intel's IGP, then the Athlon is useful in developing countries.
This is still based on double priced GPUs, unfortuantely, but AMD remain relevant especially with the 12100 and 12300 not actually available yet
You seem fixated on price but AMD are not competing on price. That much is clear, that's why we don't agree with you. What is your logic for fixating on cost and nothing else? Performance/$, overall performance, and availability are far more valid than an MSRP given the supply and demand issues right now making MSRPs inaccurate if not entirely irrelevant.
Most likely outcome, I would expect them to drop the price to match or be close to 12400f and then the new 5600x 3d vcache would be taking on the 12600k with both price and performance .
12600k has 4 more cores, being e cores but it has higher ipc and also clock speeds to give it faster single core and multicore scores.
Ironically it gets the least boost for gaming. It is faster in gaming but not all that much for most things!
Most muticore stuff it really smashes the 5600x cos of 4 extra cores but it varies a bit !
Wtaf your comment or mine has to do with the un-released yet I3 12100 and 12300, the actual product in the OP.
I couldn't tell you but since we're just chatting about irrelevant SKUs.
12400F is not released yet or 12100 and 12300 etc and until they are, I cant see AMD cutting prices.
But we won't have to wait long supposedly !
Be interesting to see what they do? I think what a few people in here are saying is that, you are comparing an unreleased product with a current product and AMD will probly cut price if and when they need to .
But at the moment 12400F is not released and therefore is not a directly competing product with 5600X.
Certainly not yet in that sense , but it may well be when the time comes. Most people want cheap! Mostly enthusiasts would be early adopters of new high end Alderlake. Atm only the high end stuff ie k versions with higher cost have been released ! When the soon to be released non k versions are out, along with cheaper chipset motherboards, then i would expect a lot more people to start buying them.
The i3 12300 quad core in the topic of this thread is absolutely decimating the 5350G (Zen3 Quad core) and that's likely because the Zen3 APUs with reduced cache really do suck compare to their full-cache counterparts. I'm not saying that they suck in isolation - they're great overall solutions if you need the IGP but you're giving up a lot of performance to get that IGP. The fact that AL is handily beating the full-fat 5000X-series chips does not bode well for AMD's APU lineup at all, given that most of the AL chips come with a functional IGP and give up zero performance for that fact.
In honesty, these budget Zen 3 APUs offer no competition to Zen 2 quads, never mind the upcoming Alder Lake i3 line. Unless AMD introduces a new low price alternative, they'll have nothing to rival Intel in this segment.
I'm not saying it beats, Anything, what I am saying is it's as good as any old era quad and some more recent and is presently the cheapest viable gaming pc option add a £50 board and 16 GB of ddr4 and your still shy of the cost of some CPU but it'll do the job ,Cheaper.