Intel Processor Specs.7z.003
Intel processor numbers are not a measure of performance. Processor numbers differentiate features within each processor family, not across different processor families. See -numbers.html for details.
Intel processor specs.7z.003
Max Turbo Frequency refers to the maximum single-core processor frequency that can be achieved with Intel Turbo Boost Technology. See www.intel.com/technology/turboboost/ for more information and applicability of this technology.
Now that the Core i9-13900K is here, we can get an idea about how it holds up to the results we gathered in our Ryzen 9 7950X review. Our results show one thing: The journey to have the best processor of this generation is highly competitive.
Intel is using the same LGA1700 socket, so if you built a machine with a 12th-gen processor, you should be able to upgrade without buying a new motherboard. Be sure to check the support resources for your particular motherboard, though. You need an updated BIOS on 600-series motherboards before installing the Core i9-13900K.
It seems that Intel's upcoming laptop CPU may easily dethrone even some of the best desktop processors, let alone mobile chips. Even chips that are not out yet are already in danger, such as Apple's M2 Max.
Two of the top laptop processors in 2022 are the Intel Core i7-12700H vs AMD Ryzen 6900HS, but with so many other factors impacting laptop performance, it's hard to compare them head to head. So, when Lenovo offered me the opportunity to run the Intel version of its excellent Slim 7 Pro X laptop, which I had previously reviewed in its AMD incarnation, I jumped at the chance to pit two very similar laptops against each other.
I say "very similar" because, unfortunately, they're not identical. Importantly, they both used the Nvidia GeForce RTX 3050 GPU, which means we're directly comparing the CPUs themselves. The most important difference, beyond the processors, was that the AMD version running the Ryzen 9 6900HS CPU enjoyed 32GB of 6400MHz LPDDR5 RAM. The Intel Core i7-12700H version was loaded with "just" 16GB of slower 5200MHz LPDDR5 RAM. That means that while our benchmark results are likely to be close enough to gauge the performance differences, we can't be truly scientific. And the Ryzen 9 6900HS is a lower-power version of that chip while the Core i7 is full-power.
Architecturally, the Celeron G4920 falls into Intel's 8th Generation "Coffee Lake" product line. This light-hitting processor has two CPU cores that operate at 3.2GHz with support for neither Turbo Boost nor Hyper-Threading technology. Its built-in L3 cache is also relatively small by today's standards, at 2MB.
Before looking at the benchmarks, I should note that during our tests the AMD processors have a slight, but justifiable, advantage over the Intel CPUs in our testing process. As many high-end Intel motherboards lack video ports, and a typical Celeron buyer isn't going to use a Z370 or Z390 mainboard with such a budget chip, we had to look down-stream for a proper testbed to use for testing this CPU and another (Pentium) budget processor on Intel's LGA 1151 socket. We ultimately settled on Asrock's DeskMini 310 bare-bones mini-PC to run our Intel LGA 1151 budget CPU tests. The motherboard in that system, though, supported RAM only up to 2,600MHz.
As a result, the Intel Celeron and Pentium CPUs graphed below were benchmarked with DDR4 memory clocked at 2,600MHz, while the AMD processors were tested using an AM4 B350 board with DDR4 DRAM clocked at 3,000MHz. (The B350-based motherboard was the Gigabyte AB350-Gaming 3.(Opens in a new window)) That should give AMD a slight advantage in some tests, notably the graphics and 7-Zip benchmarks. Both systems' memory was configured in dual-channel mode using two 8GB RAM sticks for a total of 16GB. That said, this is a justifiable configuration choice given how these CPUs will likely be installed and configured in real life.
In the actual performance graphs, we also included a couple of older-gen Core i3 and i5 CPUs for perspective, as well as a current-gen Ryzen 5, but these chips are a tier above the Athlon, Pentium, and Celeron offerings here. The Celeron G4920's primary competitor is AMD's Athlon 200GE. Their prices are similar. Both of these processors feature two 3.2GHz CPU cores, but the Athlon has a few notable advantages including twice the L3 cache (4MB) and simultaneous multithreading support (letting it process four threads at once).
The Celeron G4920 performed better when tested with Blender 2.77a, or at least some of its competition performed worse. A few of the other processors including the AMD Ryzen 5 3400G and Intel Core i5-8400 were still several times as fast as the Celeron, but the absolute performance gap between the G4920 and the Athlon 200GE was at least smaller.
Our old, single-threaded iTunes 10.6 encoding test tends to run better on Intel processors, and favors high single-core clock speeds, and it showed as the Celeron managed to pull ahead of its Athlon nemesis for the first time here.
The large performance gap between the Celeron and the Athlon and Pentium is likely due to a combination of factors. In addition to its weaker graphics processor, its slower clock speed and limited L3 cache also contribute to making running games on the Celeron G4920 a far less rewarding experience than on the G-series Athlon or Ryzens, or even the Pentium Gold.
All things considered, the Celeron G4920 isn't a bad processor; it's slower than I'd want to deal with on a daily basis, but your aging parent who just wants to check Facebook and do one thing at a time would find it just fine.
I wrote for the well-known tech site Tom's Hardware for three years before I joined PCMag in 2018. In that time, I've reviewed desktops, PC cases, and motherboards as a freelancer, while also producing deals content for the site and its sibling ExtremeTech. Now, as a full-time PCMag staffer, I'm focusing on reviewing processors and graphics cards while dabbling in all other things PC-related.
The Intel Core i3-1115G4 is a dual-core SoC for laptops and Ultrabooks based on the Tiger Lake-U generation (UP3) that was launched in September 2020. It integrates two Willow Cove processor cores (4 threads thanks to HyperThreading). Each core can clock from 3 GHz (base speed) to 4.1 GHz (single- and dual-core boost). The faster Core i5 and i7 models offer more cores and are therefore significantly faster.
If the AMD Ryzen 3 3300X is the desktop processor that blurs the line between a great budget gaming CPU and a solid budget content-creation engine, the $99 Ryzen 3 3100 is the "lite" version. It's a chip that shores up the low end of AMD's Ryzen stack as a solid pick for PC gamers who are just a Jackson short of what you'd spend on a 3300X. Does it need to exist? Maybe not, but it still has its own rare charm, and is a first: an under-$100 four-core/eight-thread processor, which is a great deal no matter which way you slice it. In general, we're going to recommend you go with the Ryzen 3 3300X instead, but if that $20 difference between the two chips is your difference-maker, the Ryzen 3 3100 is a value-minded little beastie that gets the job done almost as well. Just know that it requires a video card alongside it; it has no integrated graphics, unlike its Intel equivalents.
In its press materials, AMD has been pressing the advantage that the Ryzen 3 3100 has over Intel's currently sold competing processor in the same price bracket, the four-core/four-thread Core i3-9100. Here's a look at the current state of play in that tight budget space around $100. Note: The Core i3-10100, not tested here, is the closest price match to the Ryzen 3 3100 in Intel's pending 10th Generation "Comet Lake-S" line, expected to hit the street later this month.
One of the most widely used predictors of a CPU's relative performance is the Cinebench R15 benchmark, which offers a good overview of performance on many different types of demanding apps. It's a CPU-centric test that gauges both the single-core performance and the multicore performance of a processor when it is stressed. The resulting scores are proprietary numbers that represent the CPU's capabilities while rendering a complex 3D image.
As an all-core rendering benchmark, the Handbrake test is a great indicator of generally how well a processor will handle tasks like video editing, video rendering, and video conversion. These kinds of apps tend to munch on all the cores and threads they can get in their teeth.
The AMD Ryzen 3 3100 is a CPU that fills a very notable niche: credible under-$100 processors, if only by a dollar. In that category are quite a few contenders (low-end CPUs are the ones purchased in most volume), but with the launch of both the Ryzen 3 3100 and the Ryzen 3 3300X happening at the same time, in almost every case AMD continues to compete against its biggest rival of 2020: itself.
Intel's latest 12th Generation Alder Lake processors have cemented themselves as some of the best CPUs on the market. Chinese publication XFastest's review (opens in new tab) of the unreleased Core i3-12100 shows that the quad-core Alder Lake chip also packs some serious firepower.
Unlike high-end Alder Lake SKUs, the Core i3-12100 doesn't feature the hybrid design. This means that the quad-core chip with Hyper-Threading is only carrying Intel's Golden Cove cores. The processor is outfitted with 12MB of L3 cache. Previous retailer listings pegged the Core i3-12100 with a 3.3 base clock. XFastest observed the Core i3-12100 peaking at 4.3 GHz, which is likely the single-core boost clock. Since the news outlet's Core i3-12100 is an engineering sample, the final clock speeds for the quad-core part could vary. Therefore, we also recommend taking the test results with a bit of salt. 041b061a72