Intel Core i3-9100F vs. Ryzen 5 1600 AF: Battle of the Budget CPUs

Irata

Posts: 524   +646
TechSpot Elite
Quick question: Did you test both CPU using the boxed cooler and if so what were the temps / noise ?

Seeing for how little the 2700 series goes right now, that may even be a better alternative - budget allowing of course. Then again, you could always upgrade to that or a 3000 series (once they become even cheaper) later on.

Newegg has the 2700 for $149 and the 2700x for $169 but sadly that no longer includes the free game, only the three months X-Box subscription.
 

dirtyferret

Posts: 590   +662
FYI, the Ryzen is the better CPU but while the 1600 was selling for $85 on Amazon it quickly shot up to $140. Not sure if it's still at that price but that would change the playing field.
 

Theinsanegamer

Posts: 1,843   +2,132
Those 1% lows, ooof.

OTOH, if those occured when a level loaded in and thta was it, it wouldnt really matter in the long run. My old i5 3570k seems to play modern games just fine at 4.2 GHz, with the only hitching being during the loading of a level.

Still this next gen may be the eventual death of quad cores for multiplayer gaming. Would have been nice to see a ryzen 3 chip to see how AMD's quad cores handle the same load, and if it is just a intel problem or a quad core problem.
 

Irata

Posts: 524   +646
TechSpot Elite
Those 1% lows, ooof.

OTOH, if those occured when a level loaded in and thta was it, it wouldnt really matter in the long run. My old i5 3570k seems to play modern games just fine at 4.2 GHz, with the only hitching being during the loading of a level.

Still this next gen may be the eventual death of quad cores for multiplayer gaming. Would have been nice to see a ryzen 3 chip to see how AMD's quad cores handle the same load, and if it is just a intel problem or a quad core problem.
Doubt it's an Intel problem but rather a 4 core or even 4 thread issue, so including a Ryzen 5 3400 G (4C8T) and something like a 4C4T 2300X would be interesting .

Speaking of them - if you look at retailers, Newegg and Amazon have the 1300X listed @ $127 / 134.

Who in their sane mind would buy it at that price ? Especially considering the deals you can get on the 1600AF, 3200G and i3-9100F ?

For me those should be sold off in the $20 range, to be used as decoration (for that price I would get one to put it in a shelf)
 

Karl Hungus

Posts: 56   +30
I have to wonder how these benchmarks are being performed. I was just playing Hitman 2 last night (1440p, Ultra) on my lowly i5 4670K@4.5GHz, and I have to cap the frames at 72fps on my 75Hz monitor and that's with a 1070. Same with BF V, Battlefront 2 and BF1 (when I actually play them that is). Smooth gameplay, no stuttering whatsoever. Is this i3 really that much of a dud?
 
FYI, the Ryzen is the better CPU but while the 1600 was selling for $85 on Amazon it quickly shot up to $140. Not sure if it's still at that price but that would change the playing field.
Not sure where you are but here in the US, I just checked and Amazon still has them in stock at $85. There is the discontinued and worse AE for higher prices but the good AF version is 85 (see link).

https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Processor-Wraith-Stealth-YD1600BBAFBOX/dp/B07XTQZJ28
 

dirtyferret

Posts: 590   +662
"Where you can't get the 1600 AF, the next best thing is the Ryzen 5 2600 at $200. That’s a hefty 53% increase in price though."

I assume that is a typo and Steve intended to put "Ryzen 5 3600 at $200" or "Ryzen 5 2600 for $120" especially since the affiliate link & hyper link to Amazon has the 2600 for $120 and the 3600 for $175. The Ryzen 1600AF is back down to $85.
 

dirtyferret

Posts: 590   +662

cfbcfbcfb

Posts: 28   +17
Sounds great, but the author(s) haven't been checking prices on 1600AF's. Resellers are now selling them for well over $100, and that reported $85 cost hasn't been seen in about a month.

Good to know folks can virtually compare cpu gens by specs, but can't do a price check.
 

cfbcfbcfb

Posts: 28   +17
Last week it was $140 mostly due to Amazon being out of stock and the other merchants taking advantage of that in the listing.
And that "AMD Authorized Reseller" charges a restocking fee and wants you to pay return shipping on a defective CPU. It could be $4 and I wouldn't support that BS.
 

dirtyferret

Posts: 590   +662
And that "AMD Authorized Reseller" charges a restocking fee and wants you to pay return shipping on a defective CPU. It could be $4 and I wouldn't support that BS.
Make an A to Z complaint directly to Amazon customer service if that happens to you. Our company sells on Amazon and I can tell you Amazon backs the customer up 9 times out of 10 on A-Z complaints.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Charles Olson

amstech

Posts: 2,621   +1,791
Yeah a 6/6 chip vs a 4/4 chip, we know those results.

However, this is a great review to show the AMD 3600 6/12 against the Intel 8700K 6/12.
Judging by this review, core for core and thread for thread they are VERY similar in performance, with the 8700K even winning a benchmark or two, like Blender.
Again, the gaming benchmarks are what we thought, and while the 8700K can hit 5.2GHz all day and pick up another 4-8FPS in games with the additional 500MHz overclocked, lets look at the stock vs stock results.

Creed: Identical Performance, 8700K a few FPS faster
8700K: 75/102
3600: 77/99

B5: Difference of 11 FPS Low, 18 FPS Average, 8700K faster
8700K: 114/167
3600: 103/149

Raider: Difference of 10 FPS Low, 19 FPS Average, 8700K faster
8700K: 78/114
3600: 68/95

Division: Identical Performance
8700K: 102/159
3600: 106/158

Far Cry ND: Difference of 10 FPS Low, 7 FPS Average, 8700K faster
8700K 84/110
3600:74/103

Hitman: Difference of 12 FPS Low, 13 FPS Average, 8700K faster
8700K: 94/118
3600: 82/105

3Kngs: Difference of 3 FPS Low, 4 FPS Average, 8700K faster
8700K: 105/127
3600: 102/123

So overall the 8700K is about 8-20 FPS give or take faster for Low and Average, however I think you will see more cases of each if you did 30 games. 7-8 games you would see identical performance, 11-12 games you would see 8-12 FPS, and 10 games you would see 15-25 FPS more with the 8700K. In all actuality the AMD Ryzen 3600 is really about the same, slower or a little faster then the 8700K across the board, with the 3600 having a very slight overall advantage with computational benchmarks, and the 8700K having a distinct advantage with gaming, along with a hefty 400-500MHz of overclock room.
Interesting tidbit, the 8700K released in August of 2017 while the Ryzen 3600 released July 7th of 2019. Love the matchup of these two chips, the 3600 is such a beast for the money.
The 9900K vs the 3800X is another favorite of mine, putting 8/16 chips against one another.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lounds

pyro226

Posts: 29   +8
Sounds great, but the author(s) haven't been checking prices on 1600AF's. Resellers are now selling them for well over $100, and that reported $85 cost hasn't been seen in about a month.

Good to know folks can virtually compare cpu gens by specs, but can't do a price check.
Check the amazon link at the bottom of the article. They are indeed back to $85.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fps4ever

JimboJoneson

Posts: 203   +224
As far as performance is concerned that will only hurt it when those patches are deployed.
So I can have either performance OR security?

That's just amazing, one can never have too many choices ... AMD doesn't even give you that choice - with them your forced to have both.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TempleOrion

SethNW

Posts: 15   +9
FYI, the Ryzen is the better CPU but while the 1600 was selling for $85 on Amazon it quickly shot up to $140. Not sure if it's still at that price but that would change the playing field.
Personally I would still rather save up and pay that, than get i3 9100F, CPU thst if rumors are correct about 10th gen will become new Pentium. Just saying. But yes, it is 120USD now, which is not surprise, considering insane value and probably how quickly people grabbed them. Low supply and high demand always means bigger prices. But i3 is just not worth it. Even if you get Ryzen 3, you can at least wait for a year and upgrade to new Ryzen as prices drop. While on Intel side, 10th gen will require new motherboards and prices won't drop. After all, 7700K is still a 300USD chip even after all those years, while R7 1st and 2nd gen have dropped below 200USD. Just saying.

Plus if there is no emergency, you could also just wait till demand drops a bit and supply starts catching up.
 

hk2000

Posts: 121   +65
TechSpot Elite
I have the older equivalent of the i3 on 2 different HTPC systems and they have been performing well enough for years now without issues. The thing is, no one buys it for gaming- most of the scores here are really meaningless to buyers of this CPU, like someone else said, where are the media player and web browsing tests?
Personally, I will never go back to building with pinned CPUs and sockets!
 

Steve

Posts: 2,631   +2,517
Staff member
"Where you can't get the 1600 AF, the next best thing is the Ryzen 5 2600 at $200. That’s a hefty 53% increase in price though."

I assume that is a typo and Steve intended to put "Ryzen 5 3600 at $200" or "Ryzen 5 2600 for $120" especially since the affiliate link & hyper link to Amazon has the 2600 for $120 and the 3600 for $175. The Ryzen 1600AF is back down to $85.
I think that was a mistake by the editor, I'm discussing Australian prices, not US prices. This is made more clear in the video version.

I have to wonder how these benchmarks are being performed. I was just playing Hitman 2 last night (1440p, Ultra) on my lowly i5 4670K@4.5GHz, and I have to cap the frames at 72fps on my 75Hz monitor and that's with a 1070. Same with BF V, Battlefront 2 and BF1 (when I actually play them that is). Smooth gameplay, no stuttering whatsoever. Is this i3 really that much of a dud?
It's an NPC heavy section of the game that requires more than 4-cores, you can see where the test takes place here, jump to 10:16

Check the amazon link at the bottom of the article. They are indeed back to $85.
As far as I'm aware they have always been $85, people just seem to get confused with how Amazon works and I have to admit it's a bit strange that it doesn't show the lowest price first.
 

dirtyferret

Posts: 590   +662
As far as I'm aware they have always been $85, people just seem to get confused with how Amazon works and I have to admit it's a bit strange that it doesn't show the lowest price first.
Not in the USA on Amazon, the price has fluctuated between $85 and as high as $176 just a week ago (see link below). Amazon uses an algorithm for the buy box based on price, quantity of product, your merchant rep, and if you are fulfilling via your own warehouse (merchant fulfillment) or through Amazon's warehouse (FBA). A major factor is also whether or not Amazon itself is selling the product (sold and shipped by Amazon) as you would need to heavily discount your price to get a buy box from them.

Right now the 1600AF is $85 on Amazon fulfilled by a merchant (he is offering free shipping but may take several days) and he has the buy box. If you wanted fulfilled by Amazon (aka shipped prime two day) then starting price is $105.