In Battlefield 6, the Core i3-3217U is slower than the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i3-3217U
- Consumes up to 91% less energy – 17 vs 180 Watts
- Consumes up to 91% less energy
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
- Up to 21% faster in Battlefield 6 – 76 vs 63 FPS
- Up to 21% faster in Battlefield 6
- Is 5 years and 2 months newer – Aug 10, 2017 vs Jun 01, 2012
- Is 5 years and 2 months newer
Battlefield 6 FPS Calculator
Core i3-3217U vs Ryzen Threadripper 1950X: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
Aug 10th, 2017
Average FPS
76 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
57 FPS
100%
Price, $
$850
100%
Value, $/FPS
$11.18/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i3-3217U vs Ryzen Threadripper 1950X in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i3-3217U vs Ryzen Threadripper 1950X in core CPU performance specifications
Core i3-3217U
Jun 1st, 2012
Cores
2-core
12%
L3 Cache
3 MB
9%
Base Frequency
1.8 GHz
53%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. unknown RAM Speed
MHz
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
Aug 10th, 2017
Cores
16-core
100%
L3 Cache
32 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.4 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2666 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i3-3217U Jun 1st, 2012 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Ryzen Threadripper 1950X Aug 10th, 2017 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Jun 1st, 2012 | Release Date | Aug 10th, 2017 |
| – | MSRP | $999.00 |
Laptop | Segment | Desktop |
| Intel BGA 1023 | Socket | SP3r2 |
17W | Power Consumption | 180W |
| Other Features | ||
| unknown | RAM | 2666 MHz (DDR4) |
Intel HD 4000 | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
