Intel Core i3-12100F Review: The New Budget Champ

It performs really well, or actually amazingly for the price. Being a quad core with the caveat that this most likely only applies to single tasking.

Regarding the prices - did you check retailers ? Amazon and Microcenter don‘t list any, Bestbuy is sold out and Newegg lists it for $177, so unless availability changes spending an additional $20 to get a 12400F seems well worth it.

Now if only there were an affordable graphics card to pair with it…
 
Maybe if availability is a problem or really budget is so tight its great CPU but with the price of 12400 it makes not much sense to go for this one
budget oriented will go for the pentium instead

I hope the ppl on ebay will wake up with their i7 7700s being sold for 250+ this makes all previous perfomance kings obsolete
 
It is impressive that this 4 core 12100F can beat the 6 core Ryzen 5 3600 I have in my desktop right now. Granted my Ryzen 5 3600 is 2 years old, but still, it's something to see a 4 core beat a 6 core, esp in gaming
 
I wonder how it would actually perform with lower cost memory/motherboard/graphics that most would purchase or have with this cpu. Hard to judge with this review but a good one anyway.
 
Last edited:
I guess AMD is hamstrung a bit by not having their own fabs. Intel can churn these out more cheaply. Personally I like the i5-12500 best since that extra 200 MHz over the 12400 can get it over the 5800X's single core perf and that much closer to matching multicore perf.
 
The Ryzen 5600X really needs to get a price cut.
It‘s getting there…$239 at Microcenter, €262 at Mindfactory. Still a bit to go.

AMD‘s advantage at the moment is that they can sell Ryzen 5000 to existing AM4 customers who don‘t need to get a graphics card vs new system builders (and upgrading the CPU only is a reasonably easy task.

That said, I hope AM4 + Zen 3 stay around as budget platform once AM5 and Zen 4 are released.
 
I guess AMD is hamstrung a bit by not having their own fabs. Intel can churn these out more cheaply. Personally I like the i5-12500 best since that extra 200 MHz over the 12400 can get it over the 5800X's single core perf and that much closer to matching multicore perf.
This, and AMD can‘t make as many Epyc CPU as customers want. Don‘t think Intel has that issue at regular prices in HPC right now.
 
Can you not include games like run over 300fps like Rainbow six siege . Theses types of benchmarks are useless even for people with high refresh monitor.
 
Did the memory actually run at 3200 or was it capped at 2666 like the 10100? I don't believe the 10100 could go beyond 2666 on a b or h 500 series board, but i5 and up could. Curious about the 12100 though.
 
AMD is the only reason why we even saw CPUs like the 12100 in the timeframe we did.

If not for AMD, Intel would happily still sell us 14nm++++++++++++++++ CPUs and 4 Core CPU's as the high-end mainstream customer option practically until the seas 'gone dry and the rocks melt with the sun.
 
Did the memory actually run at 3200 or was it capped at 2666 like the 10100? I don't believe the 10100 could go beyond 2666 on a b or h 500 series board, but i5 and up could. Curious about the 12100 though.

Intel unlocked Memory Speed Overclocking in the B560 boards and this continues in the B660 boards. As a B360 user, I am mildly annoyed in 2666MHz.
 
The Ryzen 5600X really needs to get a price cut.

Not really (Yes it should be lower, but there's no way it can get as low as the intel competing midrange products while still being profitable it's just older tech): AMD just needs actual low end chips: it's been a long time since they don't produce or sell any Ryzen 3 tier CPUs.

So I don't really see the 5600x as losing to the 12100F, I just see it as intel wining by default: opposite team just didn't show up and intel wins the budget category just by having a budget product you can actually buy.

What AMD should do (And probably would do if they didn't have to wait in line for TSMC allocation after Apple has everything they want and AMD gets the scraps that fall off their table) is just release a cut down version of defective 5600g as a 5300g: a 6/6 chip. Maybe even a 5200 non g for when those 5600g have manufacturing issues on those graphics (Unless they can slightly cut them but cutting those any more makes them basically not really usable anymore)

But anyone that bought a 5600x since over a year ago has no reason to upgrade to a 12100 or a 12400 at all since well, we're talking over a year of not having a real intel rival: that's a great purchase if you ask me.
 
AMD is the only reason why we even saw CPUs like the 12100 in the timeframe we did.

If not for AMD, Intel would happily still sell us 14nm++++++++++++++++ CPUs and 4 Core CPU's as the high-end mainstream customer option practically until the seas 'gone dry and the rocks melt with the sun.

You could go back and forth with statements formed like that. Here:
AMD wouldn't have made Ryzen if Intel wasn't stagnant.
...
 
Never had at home something below i7's, didn't know i3 is a quad core + HT this days.
Pretty impressive performance for an entry CPU.
 
Round about the Pentium G3258 but culminating with the G4560, true entry level crept down below the i3 line as IPC, higher clock speeds, and finally hyperthreading made their way into the Pentium-branded level of processors.
 
Dont really see any need to upgrade my Ryzen 5 2600 which I got with a motherboard for like 140 bucks from Microcenter IIRC a long time ago.

When all you do is websurf on your PC, you dont need to upgrade much :/. Too bad Pc gaming sucks so bad.
 
Back