Key Differences
In short — Core i7-10700F outperforms the cheaper Core i3-10100 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Core i3-10100 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i7-10700F and the cheaper Core i3-10100 have been released at the same time.
Advantages of Core i7-10700F
- Performs up to 5% better in Starfield than Core i3-10100 - 62 vs 59 FPS
- Consumes up to 32% less energy than Intel Core i3-10100 - 65 vs 95 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i3-10100 - 16 vs 8 threads
Advantages of Core i3-10100
- Up to 58% cheaper than Core i7-10700F - £100.20 vs £239.43
- Up to 56% better value when playing Starfield than Core i7-10700F - £1.70 vs £3.86 per FPS
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i7-10700F doesn't have integrated graphics
Starfield
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
62
100%
Value, £/FPS
£3.86/FPS
44%
Price, £
£239.43
41%
FPS Winner
Buy for £239.43 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 147 minutes ago
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
59
95%
Value, £/FPS
£1.7/FPS
100%
Price, £
£100.2
100%
Value Winner
Buy for £100.2 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 147 minutes ago
My Games
With selected game settings
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Core i7-10700F | vs | Core i3-10100 |
---|---|---|
Apr 30th, 2020 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
Core i7 | Collection | Core i3 |
Comet Lake | Codename | Comet Lake |
Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 4 |
16 | Threads | 8 |
2.9 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.6 GHz |
4.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.3 GHz |
65 W | TDP | 95 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
29.0x | Multiplier | 36.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 630 |
No | Overclockable | No |