Intel has prolonged given run divided from chip opposition AMD in a margin of high-end opening CPUs. The company’s stream 6th-Generation Core “Skylake” flagship, a Core i7-6700KAMD FX-9590 and AMD FX-8370Core i5-6600K.
But down toward a other finish of a spectrum, where value matters some-more than extensive performance, things get a bit some-more complicated—especially for those meddlesome in gaming. Due mostly to a fact that complicated consoles have mixed addressable cores, we’re saying a flourishing series of AAA diversion titles that prefer, or in some cases even require, four cores (or 4 addressable threads) to run. Intel’s lowest-price current-generation chips (such as a $65 Pentium G4400) have only dual cores, and they miss a company’s Hyper-Threading technology, that allows any core to hoop dual estimate threads. This creates these chips bad choices for gamers, as we pattern some-more high-profile titles to need some-more than dual threads going forward.
AMD, meanwhile, has several sincerely affordable chips that have both 4 cores and integrated on-chip graphics that outperform a HD 530 graphics found on many of Intel’s mainstream desktop processors. These AMD chips (the association calls them “APUs”) embody a new $115 AMD A10-7860K, and a flagship (roughly $180) A10-7890K. (We’re operative on reviews of both those chips, and we’ve enclosed them in a benchmarks on a subsequent page.) And for gamers who intend to embody a dedicated graphics card, AMD’s Athlon X4 880K is maybe many appealing, interjection to a 4 cores, high time speed, and sub-$100 price. You’ll really need dedicated graphics with that chip, however, as it lacks integrated graphics altogether. But that’s what creates it a winner: It doesn’t make we compensate for a square of silicon we won’t use in a form of integrated graphics.
With all those AMD options, we of march wanted to see how Intel’s latest entry-level, gaming-friendly chip built up. So we asked a association to send us a Core i3-6100 for testing. It’s an impressively clocked part, regulating during 3.7GHz, with dual cores and Hyper-Threading. So it’s prepared and means to run any complicated game. And a HD 530 graphics is a same kind found on many pricier “Skylake” Core i5 and i7 parts. But a Core i3-6100 lacks those chips’ non-static clock-speed Turbo Boost feature, and it’s not unbarred for overclocking. So you’ll have to be happy regulating during 3.7GHz.
The Core i3-6100 is a excellent and surprisingly absolute chip for ubiquitous computing and critical gaming (provided you’ll be regulating a dedicated graphics card), yet cash-strapped builders who also need to buy a motherboard might wish to opt for an AMD chip instead. The Athlon X4 880K costs about $30 reduction than a $125 Core i3-6100, and a stepped-down Athlon X4 860K can be found as low as $75. Gamers looking for a smoothest support rates would be improved off investing that $30 to $50 in a graphics card, rather than a CPU.
Features Skylake Basics
We’ve lonesome in fact a underline advancements of Intel’s now-familiar “Skylake” platform, as good as a Core i3-6100’s LGA 1151 socket, and a various 100-family chipsets (the high-end Z170 in particular), in prior reviews. If we need to locate up, or we only need a refresher, we’d strongly advise checking out a second page of a Intel Core i7-6700K review.
Rather than clap off a full list of a Core i3-6100’s specs and how it compares to higher-end Intel Core offerings, here’s a draft approach from Intel that summarizes a line.
As we can see, a Core i3-6100 sits on a stream bottom finish of Intel’s 6th-Generation “Core” chip stack. There are dual somewhat higher-clocked Core i3 chips available, as well. But a Core i3-6100 is arguably a best value, with a 3.7GHz time speed and integrated HD 530 graphics that are only somewhat (by 100MHz) down-clocked compared to a much-costlier counterparts.
The other important fact in a draft above is that Intel’s Core i3 chips are rated during 47 watts, while AMD’s high-end APUs (and a Athlon X4 880K) are rated during 95 watts. While TDP (thermal pattern power, a dimensions of feverishness output) generally doesn’t interpret to accurate energy expenditure numbers, it’s transparent that Intel’s CPUs still have a outrageous advantage when it comes to opening per watt. As we’ll see, a Core i3 chip generally outperforms AMD’s competing chips on many CPU-specific tasks. If electricity is costly where we live, that might be reason adequate to opt for an Intel chip over AMD, yet if you’re going to supplement a high-end graphics label in your complement as well, it will devour many some-more energy when gaming than any one of these processors.
Also note that, like a Core i7-6700K, this chip requires a new motherboard with an LGA 1151 socket. You can’t dump it into an existent Z97- or H97-chipset motherboard. And we expected won’t be means to lift over aged RAM, either, as many new Intel-based play need DDR4. We’ve been utterly tender with a new facilities that have landed on many of a new LGA 1551-equipped Z170 motherboards. Most of a new facilities have to do with intensely rapid storage around PCI Express x4 M.2 SSD slots and ports for USB 3.1 Gen 2, that doubles a fanciful bandwidth over USB 3.0. (See a extensive authority on USB 3.1.) For sum about these new facilities and others, be certain to check out a examination of a MSI Z170A Gaming M5, a sub-$200 house that delivers some of a best of what a new Z170 play have to offer.
But, as we remarkable in a examination of a Athlon X4 880K, some new AMD-based Socket FM2+-based play also offer many of these features, among them USB 3.1 and M.2 storage slots. And AMD play are generally some-more affordable than Intel-based options. That’s another nick in AMD’s preference if you’re building a complement from blemish and cost is your first, second, and third concern.
That being said, if you’re formulation on building a tricked-out PC with some-more than dual graphics cards and mixed M.2 drives, Intel’s Z170 chipset is really some-more advanced, and it offers some-more bandwidth (via PCI Express 3.0 lanes) than AMD’s aging high-end FM2+ A88X chipset. So if loads of high-end components are in a cards for your subsequent build, we’d really go a Intel route.