Key Differences
In short — Core i3-7100 outperforms the cheaper FX-6100 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-6100 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i3-7100 is 1910 days newer than the cheaper FX-6100.
Advantages of Intel Core i3-7100
- Performs up to 11% better in Battlefield IV than FX-6100 - 407 vs 367 FPS
- Consumes up to 46% less energy than AMD FX-6100 - 51 vs 95 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD FX-6100 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD FX-6100
- Up to 26% cheaper than Core i3-7100 - CA$98.43 vs CA$132.99
- Up to 18% better value when playing Battlefield IV than Core i3-7100 - CA$0.27 vs CA$0.33 per FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i3-7100 - 6 vs 4 threads
Battlefield IV
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jan 3rd, 2017
FPS
407
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$0.33/FPS
81%
Price, CA$
CA$132.99
74%
FPS Winner
Buy for CA$132.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 125 minutes ago
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
FPS
367
90%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$0.27/FPS
100%
Price, CA$
CA$98.43
100%
Value Winner
Buy for CA$98.43 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 124 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jan 3rd, 2017
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i3-7100 | vs | AMD FX-6100 |
---|---|---|
Jan 3rd, 2017 | Release Date | Oct 12th, 2011 |
Core i3 | Collection | FX |
Kaby Lake | Codename | Zambezi |
Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | AMD Socket AM3+ |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 6 |
4 | Threads | 6 |
3.9 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.3 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.6 GHz |
51 W | TDP | 95 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 32 nm |
39.0x | Multiplier | 16.5x |
Intel HD 630 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |