New (?) i3-9100F CPU? (3.6Ghz base, 4.2Ghz turbo)

[VirtualLarry]

https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i3-9th-gen-core-i3-9100f/p/N82E16819118072

Now this looks like a really interesting entry-level CPU.

$114.99

Has Turbo to 4.2Ghz (i3-8100 doesn't have Turbo, I don't think - is the the first i3 with Turbo?), and relatively inexpensive (for Intel, especially).

Given that the Ryzen R3 1200 is now selling on sale for $70, this may not be an exceptional value for Intel, but the simple fact that this is a competent 4-core with Turbo, for nearly $100, seems to me that it would be a good seller for lower-end / budget gaming PCs.

(Though, an i5-2500K / i5-3570K @ 4.4-4.5Ghz might give it a run for the money. Though those platforms used DDR3, and thus uses DDR4.)

Optane and SSD supported as well, too.

Edit: Only supports DDR4-2400 officially? Is this still a Kaby Lake die, with Turbo enabled?

---

Intel Core i3-9100F Coffee Lake 4-Core 3.6 GHz (4.2 GHz Turbo) LGA 1151 (300 Series) 65W BX80684i39100F Desktop Processor Without Graphics



Be the first to review this product... Ask Or Answer A Question




In stock. Limit 50 per customer. Ships from United States.

Sold and Shipped by Newegg

• 9th Gen Intel Processor
• Discrete GPU Required - No Integrated Graphics
• Only Compatible with Intel 300 Series Motherboard
• Socket LGA 1151 (300 Series)
• Max Turbo Frequency 4.2 GHz
• DDR4 Support
• Intel Optane Memory and SSD Supported
• Turbo Boost Technology 2.0 offers mainstream performance for exceptional overall productivity

 

[coercitiv]

$114.99

this may not be an exceptional value for Intel, but the simple fact that this is a competent 4-core with Turbo, for nearly $100, seems to me that it would be a good seller for lower-end / budget gaming PCs.

i5 9400F is $149 and R5 1600 is $118 at the same retailer (soon enough the R5 2600 will take it's place as Zen 2 lineup gets launched)

The i3-9100F is simply poor value for a budget gaming PC.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Well, considering the AMD R5 1600 is currently on fire-sale for $120, yes, this 4C/4T CPU (even with 4.2Ghz turbo) is a poor relative value at $115 for price/performance, but I was thinking more towards the future, when the newer 6C/12T AMD Ryzen-family CPUs might be $150, which still compare favorably with the i5-9400F price wise and price/performance wise as well, but for someone that actually prefers Intel, the i3-9100F seems like a decent lower-end value, with a 4.2Ghz turbo. I don't know if that's all-core, or 1-core. (If it's not all-core, then the CPU seems like much less of a value.)

I was thinking, if you can somehow get it to 4.2Ghz all-core (maybe with MCT on a Z390 board), then it might be almost performance-competitive in older games with the R5 1600.

For productivity, multi-tasking, or DC work, sure, the R5 1600 blows the 4C/4T Intel away.

 

[SPBHM]

well it lacks the IGP, not ideal on this price range, and how much better than the i3 8100 also depends on what the max turbo is under 4 core load,

but 4.2GHz vs 3.6 from the 8100 for ST is a nice gain.

but... I probably wouldn't go that route, since it requires a graphics card, I would probably go with at least the 1600.

 

[coercitiv]

but I was thinking more towards the future, when the newer 6C/12T AMD Ryzen-family CPUs might be $150

When the newer Ryzen family hits the shelves the R5 2600 will see a significant discount just like the 1600 does now. Keep in mind the 2600 is currently the best selling CPU on Amazon, and the i5 9400F is making good progress too. People did the math and got the message, and whether it's Intel or AMD, they buy the 6 cores for value.

To put it mildly, there won't be a shortage of cheap ~$120 6c/12t CPUs for the foreseeable future. Come July the pressure on the low-end will only increase.

[Edit] grammar, today I learned "wether" is a castrated ram

 

[VirtualLarry]

To put it mildly, there won't be a shortage of cheap ~$120 6c/12t CPUs for the foreseeable future. Come July the pressure on the low-end will only increase.

I think, nominally, a six-core is going to become the minimum standard, not just for gaming (they'll probably go 8-core), but for basic business productivity desktops too.

And as much as AMD deserves credit here for being the innovator, in terms of "moar cores", first with Phenom II X6, then with 8-core FX, and then finally with 6C/12T and 8C/16T Ryzen CPUs on AM4, I think that the biggest push was from Intel, finally moving their i5 mid-range CPU line-up for desktop, from 4-core to 6-core. AMD moved Intel, and Intel moved the industry. Now 2018 and 2019 i5 standard business desktops, are all 6-core machines.

AMD is still a better choice for enthusiasts, because their Ryzen CPU line-up are all unlocked, and even the mid-range chipsets on AM4 support overclocking.

Edit: I'm curious what kind of market penetration AMD Ryzen CPUs and APUs have, on business desktops, mostly because they lack an iGPU, which makes integrating a business desktop with non-demanding GPU needs fairly easy. Maybe we'll see a change in the line-up with Ryzen 3rd-Gen, with 7nm 8C/16T CPU chiplets (up to two per package, shown so far), and an "I/O die", that could have a small iGPU integrated. If so, those would make really killer business systems, IMHO.

 

[UsandThem]

AMD moved Intel, and Intel moved the industry. Now 2018 and 2019 i5 standard business desktops, are all 6-core machines.

It also didn't hurt that Windows 10 became a big resource hog with processes always going on in the background. It's the reason I moved my youngest son's PC from an i3 to an i5 a few years back, but now it's beginning to hold him back somewhat in games and the other various stuff he does on his PC (programming, video editing, etc.).

In hindsight, I really wish I would have just paid the extra money for an i7 because I imagine that I will have to move up to that sometime this year. Maybe if the Ryzen 3000 series turns out as good as the rumors seem to suggest, I might move him over to that (or give him my current PC and keep the Ryzen goodness for myself ).

But yeah, I also think that 6-core+ CPUs will likely become the smart entry-level minimum going forward.

 

[TheELF]

AMD is still a better choice for enthusiasts, because their Ryzen CPU line-up are all unlocked, and even the mid-range chipsets on AM4 support overclocking.

Yeah,calling them unlocked is really pushing it for ryzen as well as for the 9900k,locking all cores to the highest turbo isn't really all that exiting,if you are lucky and really really push it you get maybe 1 or 2 hundred Mhz more out of it.
It's still technically overclocking but man it's pretty pathetic.

 

[TheELF]

It also didn't hurt that Windows 10 became a big resource hog with processes always going on in the background.

They don't even make a dent in CPU usage even with the cpu clocking all the way down when nothing else is running.

 

[UsandThem]

They don't even make a dent in CPU usage even with the cpu clocking all the way down when nothing else is running.

Before I upgraded his CPU, the dual core i3 he had in there was really working to keep up with Windows processes and the various programs / apps that were working. Things like his antivirus programs, Chrome, sound software, Steam, etc. really made a dent when I watched the resource monitor. Even a virus scan kept the CPU at 100% usage the entire time it ran.

So technically not totally Windows 10 fault, the background tasks were much higher than when he was on Windows 7.

 

[coercitiv]

Before I upgraded his CPU, the dual core i3 he had in there was really working to keep up with Windows processes and the various programs / apps that were working. Things like his antivirus programs, Chrome, sound software, Steam, etc. really made a dent when I watched the resource monitor. Even a virus scan kept the CPU at 100% usage the entire time it ran.

So technically not totally Windows 10 fault, the background tasks were much higher than when he was on Windows 7.

But that isn't in any way Win 10 fault, not just technically.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Oh, he had a dual-core i3? Yeah, those are a lot weaker in comparison to today's 6/8-core CPUs. Really need a minimum of 4 cores for "smooth" operation of just Windows' desktop apps and features. Even my Athlon 200GE (Ryzen-based APUs, 2C/4T), are noticably slower than a 4C/4T 2200G, even when overclocked a bit.

 

[UsandThem]

But that isn't in any way Win 10 fault, not just technically.

Let's just end it by saying I didn't feel the need to update the i3 until I moved his PC over to 10.

He still used the same programs on it, (like Norton) but the i3 had a harder time keeping up with everything. Maybe it was Windows 10, maybe the programs used more resources in the background, or maybe it was just PC gremlins. I'll never know because the i3 is now long gone.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Or maybe, it was just after upgrading to Windows 10, that you had to deal with the Spectre/Meltdown/MDS mitigations, in both the OS and firmware.

 

[TheELF]

Nah,it's just that you get so used to the performance you have that any small change get's really apparent.

 

[scannall]

When the newer Ryzen family hits the shelves the R5 2600 will see a significant discount just like the 1600 does now. Keep in mind the 2600 is currently the best selling CPU on Amazon, and the i5 9400F is making good progress too. People made the math and got the message, and wether it's Intel or AMD, they buy the 6 cores for value.

To put it mildly, there won't be a shortage of cheap ~$120 6c/12t CPUs for the foreseeable future. Come July the pressure on the low-end will only increase.

And to think, just 2 1/2 years ago in January 2017, what people would have thought about being able to buy a 'budget' 6/12 CPU for $120. You would have been laughed off the forums. ;-)

 

[VirtualLarry]

And to think, just 2 1/2 years ago in January 2017, what people would have thought about being able to buy a 'budget' 6/12 CPU for $120. You would have been laughed off the forums. ;-)

Forgetting about Phenom II X6 and Westmere?

 

[scannall]

Forgetting about Phenom II X6 and Westmere?

I guess those were $100ish or so back then, used. But no, hadn't forgot them. I was referring to new. The X5660 is under $20 these days.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Yeah,calling them unlocked is really pushing it for ryzen as well as for the 9900k,locking all cores to the highest turbo isn't really all that exiting,if you are lucky and really really push it you get maybe 1 or 2 hundred Mhz more out of it.

Whaaaaaaat?

The R7 2700 is probably a fun chip to OC. All core boost is only like . . . 3.4 GHz, and yet people can get 4.2 GHz static out of those chips, mostly beating stock 2700x except in certain single-threaded applications. You can probably find similar stories from the R5 chips.

 

[UsandThem]

Or maybe, it was just after upgrading to Windows 10, that you had to deal with the Spectre/Meltdown/MDS mitigations, in both the OS and firmware.

It could have been a number of things. This was when Windows 10 was new, and before some major updates that fixed a lot of the initial issues. Things like excessive drive usage bugs, etc. Plus, it often takes the various programs some time to update issues that always seem to pop up with a new OS.

 

[Arkaign]

If you have a legacy system, I can't stress enough how much improvement you can see by backing your data up, making a new 1809 W10 USB install stick or DVRDL, and doing a fresh install.

Even after running disk cleanup, CCleaner, defrag, etc, the OG installs that have gone through multiple 'feature' update from say 1511 to 1803/1809 are way boggier than what you get with a wipe and direct 1809 install.