Key Differences
In short — Core i3-9100F outperforms the cheaper Core i3-3240 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Core i3-3240 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i3-9100F is 2423 days newer than the cheaper Core i3-3240.
Advantages of Intel Core i3-9100F
- Performs up to 12% better in Dying Light 2: Stay Human than Core i3-3240 - 131 vs 117 FPS
Advantages of Intel Core i3-3240
- Up to 70% cheaper than Core i3-9100F - $29.98 vs $98.86
- Up to 67% better value when playing Dying Light 2: Stay Human than Core i3-9100F - $0.28 vs $0.84 per FPS
- Consumes up to 15% less energy than Intel Core i3-9100F - 55 vs 65 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i3-9100F doesn't have integrated graphics
Dying Light 2: Stay Human
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Desktop • Apr 23rd, 2019
FPS
131
100%
Value, €/FPS
€0.84/FPS
33%
Price, €
€109.73
30%
FPS Winner
Buy for €109.73 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 172 minutes ago
Desktop • Sep 3rd, 2012
FPS
117
89%
Value, €/FPS
€0.28/FPS
100%
Price, €
€33.28
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €33.28 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 172 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Desktop • Apr 23rd, 2019
Desktop • Sep 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i3-9100F | vs | Intel Core i3-3240 |
---|---|---|
Apr 23rd, 2019 | Release Date | Sep 3rd, 2012 |
Core i3 | Collection | Core i3 |
Coffee Lake | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 2 |
4 | Threads | 4 |
3.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.4 GHz |
4.2 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
65 W | TDP | 55 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
36.0x | Multiplier | 34.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 2500 |
No | Overclockable | No |