Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — Core i3-6100 outperforms the more expensive Ryzen Threadripper 1950X on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck! The better performing Core i3-6100 is 709 days older than the more expensive Ryzen Threadripper 1950X.
Advantages of Core i3-6100
- Up to 80% cheaper than Ryzen Threadripper 1950X - CA$182.73 vs CA$907.50
- Up to 80% better value when playing Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II than Ryzen Threadripper 1950X - CA$0.92 vs CA$4.58 per FPS
- Consumes up to 72% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X - 51 vs 180 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i3-6100 - 32 vs 4 threads
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2015
FPS
198
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$0.92/FPS
100%
Price, CA$
CA$182.73
100%
Value Winner
Buy for CA$182.73 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 364 minutes ago
Desktop • Aug 10th, 2017
FPS
198
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$4.58/FPS
20%
Price, CA$
CA$907.5
20%
Buy for CA$907.5 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 364 minutes ago
My Games
With selected game settings
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2015
Desktop • Aug 10th, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Core i3-6100 | vs | Ryzen Threadripper 1950X |
---|---|---|
Sep 1st, 2015 | Release Date | Aug 10th, 2017 |
Core i3 | Collection | Ryzen Threadripper |
Skylake | Codename | Whitehaven |
Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | AMD Socket SP3r2 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 16 |
4 | Threads | 32 |
3.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.4 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.0 GHz |
51 W | TDP | 180 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
37.0x | Multiplier | 34.0x |
Intel HD 530 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |