CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 2100 vs 651 among desktop CPUs

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics

Fire Strike

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing

CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?

Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

7

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
AMD Athlon II X4 651 

CPUBoss recommends the AMD Athlon II X4 651  based on its .

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i3 2100

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i3 2100

Report a correction
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Higher clock speed 3.1 GHz vs 3 GHz Around 5% higher clock speed
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.23 GHz vs 3 GHz Around 10% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of AMD Athlon II X4 651

Reasons to consider the
AMD Athlon II X4 651

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 4 MB vs 0.5 MB 8x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
More cores 4 vs 2 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 4x more l2 cache per core
Significantly lower typical power consumption 81.25W vs 98.28W More than 15% lower typical power consumption
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.41 GHz vs 3.23 GHz More than 5% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Much lower annual home energy cost 24.09 $/year vs 37.88 $/year More than 35% lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 87.6 $/year vs 93.47 $/year More than 5% lower annual commercial energy cost
Newer Nov, 2011 vs Jan, 2011 Release date 10 months later

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i3 2100 vs Athlon II X4 651

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i3 2100
153,100 MB/s
Athlon II X4 651
125,700 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench

3D Mark 11 (Physics)

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i3 2100  vs
Athlon II X4 651 
Clock speed 3.1 GHz 3 GHz
Cores Dual core Quad core
Socket type
LGA 1155
FM1

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
SSE2
MMX
SSE4
AVX
SSE3
SSE
AMD64
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
AMD-V
3DNow!
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 65W 100W
Annual home energy cost 37.88 $/year 24.09 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 93.47 $/year 87.6 $/year
Performance per watt 1.41 pt/W 1.51 pt/W
Typical power consumption 98.28W 81.25W

details

Core i3 2100  vs
Athlon II X4 651 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 4
L2 cache 0.5 MB 4 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 3.23 GHz 3.41 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.23 GHz 3 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.23 GHz 3.41 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD Graphics 2000 N/A
Number of displays supported 2 N/A
GPU clock speed 850 MHz N/A
Turbo clock speed 1,100 MHz N/A

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1866
DDR3-1333
DDR3-1066
DDR3
Intel Core i3 2100
Report a correction
AMD Athlon II X4 651
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus