Intel Core i3-2100 Pro Reviews

Do not be fooled by the $124 pricing of the Core i3 2100. The processor is not a sloth. While it is not able to compete against a true quad-core when it comes to heavily threaded application, thanks to hyperthreading, it is more than capable in lightly-threaded applications, often coming out above AMD quad core processors. The processor is in direct competition against the AMD Phenom II X4 and Athlon II X4, often excelling in lightly threaded tasks. In most basic applications such as web-browsing, word processing, and media streaming, the Core i3 2100 is more than enough, and comes on top. The only area where the processor cannot compete is in thread-intensive applications such as video encoding and 3D rendering, where the quad-core processors still have an edge.

There is good news and bad news about the new A-Series CPU from AMD we reviewed, the A8-3850. The good news is that its integrated graphics controller is simply the best integrated solution we’ve seen so far. It was way faster than the Core i3-2100’s and, on Lost Planet 2, it was even faster than a GeForce GT 430, making us suspect that it is optimized for DirectX 11 games. It was also faster than a GeForce GT 430 for applications that use the GPU for processing (GPGPU), such as converting video files using Media Espresso. Also on the good side, applications that perform better with four “real” cores will perform better on the A8-3850 than on the Core i3-2100, which has only two “real” cores and two “simulated” ones, using Hyper-Threading technology. The bad news is that, aside from gaming and 3D rendering, the Core i3-2100 is faster and, depending on the application, by a large margin. So, if you are a gamer on a really tight budget, the new A8-3850 is a really nice option. But if you are an average user who won’t play games, the Core i3-2100 is a better option.

If you can’t stretch beyond £100 for your next CPU, the i3-2100 is a solid option. While another £60 will buy you an i5-2500K, this is a comparatively huge increase in price that doesn’t yield massive gains unless you overclock it and also buy the hardware needed for overclocking. The i3-2100 is therefore still a great processor for a cheap PC.

Overall, Core i3-2120 and Core i3-2100 appear to be a good and inexpensive addition to the Core i7 and Core i5 LGA1155 series. If you are ready to settle for a dual-core CPU with Hyper-Threading support instead of a fully-functional quad-core, these Sandy Bridge products will be the best choice for almost any situation. The only weakness of the new Core i3-2120 and Core i3-2100 is complete unfitness for overclocking, which makes them very unappealing for computer enthusiasts. However, do not forget that these processors boast a pretty decent integrated graphics core – Intel HD Graphics 2000, which means that even though some enthusiasts may not want to have these processors in their everyday systems, they will still consider them eagerly for compact multimedia PCs.

Overall though the low-end Sandy Bridge appears to be a nice upgrade from the previous generation Clarkdale CPUs, especially when considering the performance will only improve when using GCC 4.6+ to take advantage of the AVX extensions and other architectural improvements. The Intel Core i3 2100 can be found for $130 USD or less at Amazon and NewEgg, which makes it a better bargain than the slower Core i3 530 that's still going for above $130 USD.

Despite all of the nastiness Intel introduced by locking/limiting most of the Sandy Bridge CPUs, if you typically spend around $200 on a new CPU then Sandy Bridge is likely a better overclocker than anything you've ever owned before it. The biggest loser in the overclock locks is the Core i3 which now ships completely locked. The Core i3-2100 is still a step forward, but not nearly as much of one as the 2500K. For the most part you're getting a 5-20% increase in performance (although we did notice some 30-40% gains), but you're giving up overclocking as an option. For multithreaded workloads you're better off with an Athlon II X4 645; however, for lightly threaded work or a general purpose PC the Core i3-2100 is likely faster. Unless you already have a high-end Core i7, this is what you'll want to upgrade to.

When it comes down to it, Sandy Bridge has negated almost every reason you might have had to purchase an X58 or P55 system. You get the performance near that of a $1000 Core i7 980x but at about half of the total system cost. For those of you who have been holding on with Core 2 Duo or Core 2 Quad, your upgrade just arrived! Intel launches their "Tock" architecture, Sandy Bridge, and it's a winner. With incredible power efficiency, performance per watt is at an all time high. For enthusiasts Sandy Bridge is a dream with a mountain of overclocking headroom at a price that won't destroy your budget.

No doubt, there’s a lot going on in this launch. The Sandy Bridge introduction hits a number of high notes that have me dusting off an award, while simultaneously compelling me to cringe at a couple of Intel’s clumsier moves. Overclocking isn’t handled well at all. Really, the only viable option for power users is a K-series SKU. The fact that we have a couple of choices in the $200 and $300 ranges is great. But the limited overclocking (Core i5/i7) and outright lack of options (Core i3) strikes a sour chord sure to burn off a lot of the enthusiast equity Intel earned by launching the K-series chips last year. The graphics situation, at least on the desktop, is also pretty whacky.