Ryzen Z1 Extreme vs i3-10100F
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen Z1 Extreme outperforms Core i3-10100F by a whopping 187% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core i3-10100F and Ryzen Z1 Extreme processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1162 | 429 |
| Place by popularity | 20 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 20.99 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Phoenix (Zen 4, Ryzen 7040) |
| Power efficiency | 8.03 | 100.00 |
| Architecture codename | Comet Lake (2020) | Phoenix (Zen 4) (2023) |
| Release date | 12 October 2020 (4 years ago) | May 2023 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $122 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Core i3-10100F and Ryzen Z1 Extreme basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 16 |
| Base clock speed | 3.6 GHz | 3.3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.3 GHz | 5.1 GHz |
| Bus rate | 8 GT/s | no data |
| L1 cache | 256 KB | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 6 MB | 16 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 4 nm |
| Die size | 126 mm2 | 178 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 25,000 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on Core i3-10100F and Ryzen Z1 Extreme compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | FCLGA1200 | FP8 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i3-10100F and Ryzen Z1 Extreme. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 2.0 | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | - | no data |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Security technologies
Core i3-10100F and Ryzen Z1 Extreme technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
| Secure Key | + | no data |
| Identity Protection | + | - |
| SGX | Yes with Intel® ME | no data |
| OS Guard | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i3-10100F and Ryzen Z1 Extreme are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i3-10100F and Ryzen Z1 Extreme. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 128 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 41.6 GB/s | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon 780M ( - 2700 MHz) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i3-10100F and Ryzen Z1 Extreme.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 20 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 5.51 | 15.84 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 8 |
| Threads | 8 | 16 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 15 Watt |
Ryzen Z1 Extreme has a 187.5% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 250% more advanced lithography process, and 333.3% lower power consumption.
The Ryzen Z1 Extreme is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i3-10100F in performance tests.
Note that Core i3-10100F is a desktop processor while Ryzen Z1 Extreme is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i3-10100F and Ryzen Z1 Extreme, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
