In Rust, the Core i3-3210 is slightly slower than the Core i7-10700F. However, it's a better value for money, as it's $171 cheaper!
Core i3-3210
- Up to 52% cheaper – $159.00 vs $329.95
- Up to 52% cheaper
- Up to 46% better value in Rust – $0.76 vs $1.40/FPS
- Up to 46% better value in Rust
- Consumes up to 15% less energy – 55 vs 65 Watts
- Consumes up to 15% less energy
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
Core i7-10700F
- Up to 12% faster in Rust – 235 vs 209 FPS
- Up to 12% faster in Rust
- Is 7 years and 3 months newer – Apr 30, 2020 vs Jan 01, 2013
- Is 7 years and 3 months newer
Rust FPS Calculator
Core i3-3210 vs Core i7-10700F: Comparison of performance and price
Core i3-3210
Jan 1st, 2013
Average FPS
209 FPS
89%
Min 1% FPS
41 FPS
67%
Price, $
$159
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.76/FPS
100%
Core i7-10700F
Apr 30th, 2020
Average FPS
235 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
61 FPS
100%
Price, $
$329.95
48%
Value, $/FPS
$1.4/FPS
54%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i3-3210 vs Core i7-10700F in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i3-3210 vs Core i7-10700F in core CPU performance specifications
Core i3-3210
Jan 1st, 2013
Cores
2-core
25%
L3 Cache
3 MB
19%
Base Frequency
3.2 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Core i7-10700F
Apr 30th, 2020
Cores
8-core
100%
L3 Cache
16 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.9 GHz
91%
Turbo Frequency
4.8 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2933 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i3-3210 Jan 1st, 2013 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i7-10700F Apr 30th, 2020 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Jan 1st, 2013 | Released | Apr 30th, 2020 |
| – | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1155 | Socket | LGA1200 |
55 W | Power Consumption | 65 W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 2933 MHz (DDR4) |
Intel HD 2500 | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
