Key Differences
In short — Core i3-12100F outperforms the cheaper Core i3-3240T on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Core i3-3240T is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i3-12100F is 3431 days newer than the cheaper Core i3-3240T.
Advantages of Intel Core i3-12100F
- Performs up to 23% better in Battlefield IV than Core i3-3240T - 454 vs 370 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i3-3240T - 8 vs 4 threads
Advantages of Intel Core i3-3240T
- Up to 73% cheaper than Core i3-12100F - $25.7 vs $94.98
- Up to 67% better value when playing Battlefield IV than Core i3-12100F - $0.07 vs $0.21 per FPS
- Consumes up to 40% less energy than Intel Core i3-12100F - 35 vs 58 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i3-12100F doesn't have integrated graphics
Battlefield IV
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jan 25th, 2022
FPS
454
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.21/FPS
33%
Price, $
$94.98
27%
FPS Winner
Buy for $94.98 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 3481 minutes ago
Desktop • Sep 3rd, 2012
FPS
370
81%
Value, $/FPS
$0.07/FPS
100%
Price, $
$25.7
100%
Value Winner
Buy for $25.7 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 3480 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Jan 25th, 2022
Desktop • Sep 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i3-12100F | vs | Intel Core i3-3240T |
---|---|---|
Jan 25th, 2022 | Release Date | Sep 3rd, 2012 |
Core i3 | Collection | Core i3 |
Alder Lake | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
Intel Socket 1700 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 2 |
8 | Threads | 4 |
3.3 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.9 GHz |
4.3 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
58 W | TDP | 35 W |
10 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
33.0x | Multiplier | 30.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 2500 |
No | Overclockable | No |