Intel Core i3-14100

[W1zzard]

The Intel Core i3-14100 processor impresses with its low price of just $140. Thanks to the high boost clocks, single-threaded performance is better than most alternatives and gaming with a graphics card works very well. Power efficiency is good, too, running at less than 40 W most of the time.

Show full review

 

[Pumper]

Pretty bad, especially when compared to 8500G, which is superior in every way.

 

[mtosev]

Is this cpu unaffected by Intel's recent fiasco with their high end CPUs?

 

[Lew Zealand]

Is this cpu unaffected by Intel's recent fiasco with their high end CPUs?

Core i3 14100s and Core i5-14400s still have the Alder Lake core cache sizes so are very likely still Alder Lake parts, which are unaffected by the Raptor Lake CPU problems.

 

[AnotherReader]

Pretty bad, especially when compared to 8500G, which is superior in every way.

Its only saving grace is that the 8500G has fewer PCIe lanes. Otherwise, the Ryzen is superior in every way.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

Is this cpu unaffected by the recent Intel's fiasco with their high end CPUs?

I have one sitting here that I refuse to test with current board and operating system because I don't want it bricked. I have a couple fists full of benchmarks I've run with it on a B660-G before the last windows update pushed onto my OS.

I am to try and set up clean windows on one of 2 B660-G boards both of which have early(er) Firmware updates. This also to test my 14700K which is assumed bricked. However have been out of town for 5 days. So I couldn't get to it.

For information, the locked 14100 chips will not exceed 1.1 to 1.2v Vccsa and don't seem to exceed around 1.35v on any given load. Based on this information, and is a 58w/110w boosted part, and what we do know about findings so far, the 14100 processors should remain unaffected.

However, I would refrain from letting windows install ME firmware updates for the time being (indefinitely?).

 

[Chrispy_]

I mean it's fine, I don't hate it - but what happened to Intel's "small die" product? Alder Lake was one of two silicon dies - the large one 8P+8E die that was carved up to cover everything down to the 12600KF, and then a smaller 6C die with no E-cores that served everything lower in the product stack.

For Raptor Lake-S, I cannot find any information on the two die sizes, and I refused to believe that this i3-14100 is an 8P+16E die that's been cut down that heavily, but I also don't understand why Intel is holding onto quad-core like it's still 2011.

Are E-cores so worthless that Intel have to remove two P-cores from the i3 to stop it from completely cannibalising 6P i5 models with E-cores?

 

[ShrimpBrime]

I mean it's fine, I don't hate it - but what happened to Intel's "small die" product? Alder Lake was one of two silicon dies - the large one 8P+8E die that was carved up to cover everything down to the 12600KF, and then a smaller 6C die with no E-cores that served everything lower in the product stack.

For Raptor Lake-S, I cannot find any information on the two die sizes, and I refused to believe that this i3-14100 is an 8P+16E die that's been cut down that heavily, but I also don't understand why Intel is holding onto quad-core like it's still 2011.

Are E-cores so worthless that Intel have to remove two P-cores from the i3 to stop it from completely cannibalising 6P i5 models with E-cores?

Cause that quad core trades blows with AMD 6 core 5000 series parts at lower consumption. This is only my assumption when I pit it up against a 5600G which I also happen to own.

And would be hands down the fastest quad I've ever benched on and can't even OC it. So it's about equiviant to 7th gen at 6ghz and up lol. Give or take.

Doesn't matter how it's "cut down". Great little chip for all the Dell and HP office computers people buy. Even my own mother in laws new Dell has a 12400 in it. The 14100F is faster though....

 

[JohH]

I mean it's fine, I don't hate it - but what happened to Intel's "small die" product? Alder Lake was one of two silicon dies - the large one 8P+8E die that was carved up to cover everything down to the 12600KF, and then a smaller 6C die with no E-cores that served everything lower in the product stack.

For Raptor Lake-S, I cannot find any information on the two die sizes, and I refused to believe that this i3-14100 is an 8P+16E die that's been cut down that heavily, but I also don't understand why Intel is holding onto quad-core like it's still 2011.

Are E-cores so worthless that Intel have to remove two P-cores from the i3 to stop it from completely cannibalising 6P i5 models with E-cores?

Look at the cache sizes. 14100 is Alder Lake 6P die.

 

[Lew Zealand]

Cause that quad core trades blows with AMD 6 core 5000 series parts at lower consumption. This is only my assumption when I pit it up against a 5600G which I also happen to own.

Remember that's the Laptop 5000 series which is a slower CPU, closer to a Desktop 3600. The Desktop 5000s are a different design.

And would be hands down the fastest quad I've ever benched on and can't even OC it. So it's about equiviant to 7th gen at 6ghz and up lol. Give or take.

Doesn't matter how it's "cut down". Great little chip for all the Dell and HP office computers people buy. Even my own mother in laws new Dell has a 12400 in it. The 14100F is faster though....

What? This very review puts the 12400 at 17% faster in applications and 6% faster in 1080p gaming than the 14100.

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

Pretty bad, especially when compared to 8500G, which is superior in every way.

It offers comparable gaming performance to the 8500g, with more PCIe lanes and can use cheaper motherboards and DDR4 RAM. Motherboard cost is still an issue for socket AM5.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

Remember that's the Laptop 5000 series which is a slower CPU, closer to a Desktop 3600. The Desktop 5000s are a different design.

True, the variations matter, but pretty sure 5600G is installed in a Asus B450-I Strix Gaming playing usually brick rigs. ( my kids rig)

 

[Sithaer]

I've had a 12100F as a daily driver for more than 2 years and I can't really say anything bad about it as a casual user for non competitive gaming and media use.
I've upgraded to a 12600KF eariler this year cause I've found a really good deal on it + I could still sell my 12100F so the upgrade did not cost me much but to be honest it still wasn't necessary for my use case. 'I mean sure it helps with the shader compilation in some games that has it but other than that I still game all the same'

I guess the only thing I don't like about the 13100F or the 14100F is the pricing, at least where I live it really doesn't make sense cause its the exact same price as a 12400F. 'I've also got my 12600KF for cheaper than a 13400F for some reason and thats why I have this'

 

[Chrispy_]

Look at the cache sizes. 14100 is Alder Lake 6P die.

Yep, so where's the 6P product to compete with the 5600(X) then?

 

[Daven]

What’s most interesting to me is that the 7950X has moved ahead of the 14900k in average application performance since the original review of the 14900k.

Either the application suite changed or recent updates have reduced Raptor Lake performance.

 

[Chrispy_]

Cause that quad core trades blows with AMD 6 core 5000 series parts at lower consumption.

5600G is a mobile part retrofitted for desktop, with reduced cache, bandwidth and other compromises that make a lot of sense in a laptop, much less on a desktop.

Realistically, the Vermeer-based Ryzen 5 5600X is the closest price-comparison for this quad-core i3 and even the cheaper 5600 (non-X) is significantly faster than this i3 at a paltry $120 - arguably the best performance/$ processor on the market right now.

The 5600X, for the same price as this 14100 will game, render, encode, simulate, and emulate so much better than this i3 it's not even really a comparison, it's a total bloodbath. The i3 has an IGP the 5600X doesn't have, but it's (as reviewed) damn near worthless unless your needs are so low a decade-old netbook would satisfy your requirements.

If you truly need a processor with an IGP for $150, then it's kind of okay, which is why I said I don't hate it - but the LGA1700 is on life support, retirement is imminent, and the AM5-based 8500G is the same price on a much more desirable platform with better CPU and IGP performance as well as fantastic low power consumption. In this scenario, the 14100 is inferior in every possibly metric, but it's still a reasonable option if you have a spare LGA1700 motherboard lying around and need to fashion a casual-use PC out of it.

Either the application suite changed or recent updates have reduced Raptor Lake performance.

Likely a little of column A, and a little of column B.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

What? This very review puts the 12400 at 17% faster in applications and 6% faster in 1080p gaming than the 14100.

Well considering we are considering an office PC processor for gaming, for most the shit I played with my son, I had/have better frame rates. But we have 2 completely different systems and operating systems.

Secondly, looking at the office benchmarks, the 14100F does very well. 7zip would be a comparable benchmark too.

Of course a quad isn't faster than a hexa on all fronts. Just on the ones where it may matter or apply.

Would it be silly I tested mine with a 4070 Super or should I pair it with an R7 260 instead???

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

5600G is a mobile part retrofitted for desktop, with reduced cache, bandwidth and other compromises that make a lot of sense in a laptop, much less on a desktop.

It's restrictions will really show on anything that hammers the PCIe bus like, say, modern games on a 8GB or lower GPU. RE VII and forspoken are two examples that immediately come to mind, and such a GPU is more likely to be paired with a i3.

Realistically, the Vermeer-based Ryzen 5 5600X is the closest price-comparison for this quad-core i3 and even the cheaper 5600 (non-X) is significantly faster.

The issue there is that, for most of their lives, those were $300 CPUs, not $125 like the i3F. The same argument could easily be used for previous gen core i5/i7 parts.

If you want the current platform, AMD has nothing other then the 8500g.

 

[Onasi]

Yep, so where's the 6P product to compete with the 5600(X) then?

The only theory I have is that Intel is just reusing the scuffed H0 dies they’ve left and/or don’t get enough new ones produced that would work as essentially a rebranded 12600 non-K which had the full 6+0 config back then? I agree it’s baffling, a full H0 can do wonders as a budget-ish chip.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

The only theory I have is that Intel is just reusing the scuffed H0 dies they’ve left and/or don’t get enough new ones produced that would work as essentially a rebranded 12600 non-K which had the full 6+0 config back then? I agree it’s baffling, a full H0 can do wonders as a budget-ish chip.

Not sure, but the G6900 was a 12th gen Dual core part. It's just what they do with damaged wafers or low yield wafers. Cut em up to something usable and make a sale. The phrase "cut your losses"

 

[Chrispy_]

The issue there is that, for most of their lives, those were $300 CPUs, not $125 like the i3F. The same argument could easily be used for previous gen core i5/i7 parts.

If you want the current platform, AMD has nothing other then the 8500g.

The $300 price point almost 4 years ago doesn't matter. When the 14th gen launched (which is the only timeframe relevant for comparison), AM4 was the affordable, low-cost platform at around half it's original cost. The same argument also works in reverse, because when the 5600X was $300, it was performing like $300 Intel offerings of 3-4 years ago.

As for the current platform in this price range, AMD may have only the 8500G, but it's better than this; Better CPU, better IGP, better power consumption, better platform lifespan, better drivers. It's win-win-win-win-win.

That doesn't make the i3-14100 awful, it's just a respectable second place performance in a two-horse race.

 

[HD64G]

Its value would be good only if sold <€100 in Europe. Especially when the 5600(X) is sold for €110-120 atm while being definitely superior in speed and total platform cost.

 

[Chrispy_]

The only theory I have is that Intel is just reusing the scuffed H0 dies they’ve left and/or don’t get enough new ones produced that would work as essentially a rebranded 12600 non-K which had the full 6+0 config back then? I agree it’s baffling, a full H0 can do wonders as a budget-ish chip.

Do you think they stopped manufafacturing H0 and the i3 lineup is just whatever damaged goods are left in inventory? They need a 6-core part to beat AMD's old AM4 Vermeer offerings as well as the new AM5 Pheonix 2 which is why limiting the i3 lineup to quad core still makes so little sense to me... :\

 

[Onasi]

@Chrispy_
Depending on the timeframe, but as of now? Yeah, I think they probably have redirected most of the manufacturing to new Alder and Lunar Lake tiles and maybe keep some production online for Raptor dies since those go into high-margin products. I could well see how from Intels perspective producing more H0, which is “outdated” and can only be sold in low-margin SKUs, might not make business sense. They also might operate on an inane assumption that offering a full 6-core CPU at below 200 dollar pricepoint might somehow “cannibalise” Raptor sales.

Obviously, all of this is pure speculation on my part, but… It’s Intel. They do be making stupid moves often nowadays.

 

[Jonny5isalivetm5]

Is the spec chart wrong then ? Wizzard clearly states this is a Alder die yet the chart shows Raptor ?