CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 6100 vs 860K among all 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

Sky Diver and Cloud Gate

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?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

8.5

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Core i3 6100 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i3 6100  based on its single-core performance and power consumption.

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 6100

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i3 6100

Report a correction
Much newer manufacturing process 14 nm vs 28 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Much lower typical power consumption 41.44W vs 77.19W More than 45% lower typical power consumption
Better PassMark (Single core) score 2,106 vs 1,596 More than 30% better PassMark (Single core) score
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 44.68 $/year vs 83.22 $/year More than 45% lower annual commercial energy cost
Much lower annual home energy cost 12.29 $/year vs 22.89 $/year More than 45% lower annual home energy cost
Newer Jul, 2015 vs Aug, 2014 Release date 11 months later
Front view of AMD Athlon X4 860K

Reasons to consider the
AMD Athlon X4 860K

Report a correction
Much better performance per dollar 12.46 pt/$ vs 1.84 pt/$ More than 6.8x better performance per dollar
Is unlocked Yes vs No Somewhat common; An unlocked multiplier allows for easier overclocking
Much better performance per watt 9.84 pt/W vs 4.51 pt/W Around 2.2x better performance per watt
More cores 4 vs 2 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i3 6100 vs Athlon X4 860K

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i3 6100  vs
Athlon X4 860K 
Clock speed 3.7 GHz 3.7 GHz
Cores Dual core Quad core
Is unlocked No Yes

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
SSE2
F16C
MMX
SSE4
AVX
SSE3
SSE
BMI1
AMD64
SSE4.1
FMA4
FMA3
SSE4.2
AMD-V
Supplemental SSE3
AES
TBM
AVX 2.0

power consumption

TDP 51W 95W
Annual home energy cost 12.29 $/year 22.89 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 44.68 $/year 83.22 $/year
Performance per watt 4.51 pt/W 9.84 pt/W
Typical power consumption 41.44W 77.19W

details

Core i3 6100  vs
Athlon X4 860K 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Manufacture process 14 nm 28 nm

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 4.25 GHz 4.37 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.39 GHz 4.45 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.25 GHz 4.37 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD Graphics 530 N/A
Number of displays supported 3 N/A
GPU clock speed 350 MHz N/A
Turbo clock speed 1,050 MHz N/A

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1866
DDR3L-1333
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Maximum bandwidth 12,800 MB/s 29,866.66 MB/s
Intel Core i3 6100
Report a correction
AMD Athlon X4 860K
Report a correction

Comments

Showing 1 comment.
Aaahh cpuboss please revise your system... it looks like you are recommending to buy a processor that cost 10 times more... And if you analize the data, the i3 6100 is NOT so better. In raw numbers it performs almost the same! You need 50 years to recover the difference in energy bills!
comments powered by Disqus