In Deathloop, the Core i3-10100 is slightly slower than the Core i5-650 and it's also a much worse value for money, as it's $87 more expensive!
Core i3-10100
- Is 10 years and 3 months newer – Apr 30, 2020 vs Jan 07, 2010
- Is 10 years and 3 months newer
- Consumes up to 11% less energy – 65 vs 73 Watts
- Consumes up to 11% less energy
Core i5-650
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop – 222 vs 220 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop
- Up to 58% cheaper – $63.33 vs $149.94
- Up to 58% cheaper
- Up to 59% better value in Deathloop – $0.28 vs $0.68/FPS
- Up to 59% better value in Deathloop
Deathloop FPS Calculator
Core i3-10100 vs Core i5-650: Comparison of performance and price
Core i3-10100
Apr 30th, 2020
Average FPS
220 FPS
99%
Min 1% FPS
165 FPS
99%
Price, $
$149.94
42%
Value, $/FPS
$0.68/FPS
41%
Core i5-650
Jan 7th, 2010
Average FPS
222 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
166 FPS
100%
Price, $
$63.33
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.28/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i3-10100 vs Core i5-650 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i3-10100 vs Core i5-650 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i3-10100
Apr 30th, 2020
Cores
4-core
100%
L3 Cache
6 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.6 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.3 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2666 MHz
100%
Core i5-650
Jan 7th, 2010
Cores
2-core
50%
L3 Cache
4 MB
67%
Base Frequency
3.2 GHz
89%
Turbo Frequency
3.466 GHz
81%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1333 MHz
50%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i3-10100 Apr 30th, 2020 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i5-650 Jan 7th, 2010 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Apr 30th, 2020 | Released | Jan 7th, 2010 |
| – | MSRP | $176.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1200 | Socket | LGA1156 |
65 W | Power Consumption | 73 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2666 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | 1333 MHz (DDR3) |
| UHD Graphics 630 | Integrated GPU | Intel HD |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
