If you’re planning to build a budget desktop PC and you’re determined to use current parts, the least-expensive Intel option available to you is the Core i3-2100 ($117 list). Still a part of Intel’s second-generation Core (“Sandy Bridge”) family, it contains most of the bells and whistles of its more powerful (and expensive) cousins, the Core i5-2500K and the Core i7-2600K, but predictably little of the power. It will do the trick for a modest-needs machine, but for stronger processing potential you’ll want something faster; and if even basic gaming is your goal, a discrete video card—or considering a system based on AMD’s newest technology instead—will be a better bet.
Like all the latest Core CPUs, the Core i3-2100 is based on Intel’s 32nm production process. It’s a dual-core chip clocked at 3.1GHz, but it can operate up to four processing threads at once due toHyper-Threading. It does not, however, support Turbo Boost, so you can’t count on extra bursts if speed if you have idling cores (which, given that this chip only has two, makes sense). The Core i3-2100 is loaded with 3MB of cache, as well as Intel HD Graphics 2000 for integrated video—this is the lesser of the two Sandy Bridge integrated video options, but it will provide some power and support for DirectX 10.1 (DX10.1), if not DX11, 3D.
As with all the Sandy Bridge CPUs, you’ll need a newer motherboard sporting an LGA1155 socket to even house the Core i3-2100—an older LGA1156 model won’t do the job. With a maximum TDP of 65 watts, this processor is also not much of an energy hog.
Performance with the Core i3-2100 was right in line with our expectations. It didn’t make much of a dent in the Core i5-2500K’s or the Core i7-2600K’s performance scores—some examples: It needed 1 minute 40 seconds to convert a video using the open-source utility Handbrake, a task the Core i5-2500K could complete in 1:12; and it rated 69.7MBps in our TrueCrypt cryptography benchmark test compared with the 142MBps the Core i5-2500K managed—though it did decently well in almost every area except gaming.
There, it showed itself to be unsuitable to even relatively low-resolution titles, earning a barely serviceable 5,718 in our 3DMark Vantage DX10 test on the Entry preset (1,024 by 768) and a paltry 1,062 on the Performance preset (1,280 by 1,024), as well as maximum average frame rates of 22 frames per second (fps) in H.A.W.X. 2, 8.5fps in Lost Planet 2, and 3.9 in S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat—all at 1,024 by 768. Like all of Intel’s CPUs, it’s better suited for everyday usage rather than more intense pushing—a standalone video card, would make a big difference.
As, for that matter, would one of AMD’s new A-Series Accelerated Processing Units (APUs). AMD and Intel chips aren’t interchangeable of course—you need to make your decision and stick with it through the life of your system—but if basic 3D gaming interests you, the A8-3850 delivers markedly better results. With that APU in an ASRock A75 Pro4 motherboard in an otherwise identical test system, it earned 3DMark Vantage scores of 14,828 (on the Entry preset) and 3,685 (on the Performance preset); as well as 49fps and 41fps in H.A.W.X. 2, 27.4fps and 20.7fps in Lost Planet 2, and 13.2fps and 9fps in S.T.A.L.K.E.R., in each case at 1,024 by 768 and 1,280 by 1,024 respectively. Plus, it could even run DX11 games Intel can’t (though, in fairness, its frame rates took an even steeper drop, at least with all of the details cranked up the way we had them).
AMD accomplishes these gains by sacrificing some processing power, however: The A8-3850’s Handbrake time of 2 minutes 10 seconds was drastically behind the Core i3-2100’s, and it finished applying 12 filters and effects to a photo in Photoshop CS5 in just over 3 minutes instead of just over 5. So if you aren’t going to need or want the 3D capabilities, you’re better off with a speedier Intel chip.
There’s nothing wrong with the Intel Core i3-2100, provided you have a clear understanding of its limitations. If bang for the buck is really important to you, and you have a few more bucks to elicit those bangs, the Core i5-2500K costs almost exactly $100 more, but offers an even better blend of performance characteristics in every area. (If you don’t care about its unlocked multiplier, the otherwise identical Core i5-2500, for $205, is also a fine deal.) If graphics are a deal-breaker and you can’t be bothered to get a separate card, only AMD will come close to satisfying you. But if you know you want to go the Intel route, the Core i3-2100 is in no way a bad choice.
