Key Differences
In short — Core i5-11600K outperforms the cheaper Core i3-6100 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Core i3-6100 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i5-11600K is 2023 days newer than the cheaper Core i3-6100.
Advantages of Intel Core i5-11600K
- Performs up to 11% better in Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Core i3-6100 - 204 vs 183 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i3-6100 - 12 vs 4 threads
Advantages of Intel Core i3-6100
- Up to 67% cheaper than Core i5-11600K - €61.19 vs €182.66
- Up to 63% better value when playing Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Core i5-11600K - €0.33 vs €0.9 per FPS
- Consumes up to 59% less energy than Intel Core i5-11600K - 51 vs 125 Watts
Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
FPS
204
100%
Value, €/FPS
€0.9/FPS
36%
Price, €
€182.66
33%
FPS Winner
Buy for €182.66 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 12935 minutes ago
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2015
FPS
183
89%
Value, €/FPS
€0.33/FPS
100%
Price, €
€61.19
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €61.19 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 12936 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2015
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i5-11600K | vs | Intel Core i3-6100 |
---|---|---|
Mar 16th, 2021 | Release Date | Sep 1st, 2015 |
Core i5 | Collection | Core i3 |
Rocket Lake | Codename | Skylake |
Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 2 |
12 | Threads | 4 |
3.9 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.7 GHz |
4.9 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
125 W | TDP | 51 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
39.0x | Multiplier | 37.0x |
UHD Graphics 750 | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 530 |
Yes | Overclockable | No |