Ryzen 9 3900X vs Core i3-9100F

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i3-9100F
2019
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
4.36
Ryzen 9 3900X
2019
12 cores / 24 threads, 125 Watt
21.11
+384%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Core i3-9100F by a whopping 384% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i3-9100F and Ryzen 9 3900X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking1276236
Place by popularity34not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation15.9036.75
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Core i3AMD Ryzen 9
Architecture codenameCoffee Lake-R (2018−2019)Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)
Release date23 April 2019 (5 years ago)7 July 2019 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$122$499
Current price$83 (0.7x MSRP)$381 (0.8x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 9 3900X has 131% better value for money than i3-9100F.

Detailed specifications

Core i3-9100F and Ryzen 9 3900X 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)12 (Dodeca-Core)
Threads424
Base clock speed3.6 GHz3.8 GHz
Boost clock speed4.2 GHz4.6 GHz
L1 cache64K (per core)96K (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache6 MB (shared)64 MB
Chip lithography14 nm7 nm
Die size126 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature100 °C95 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data19,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplierNoYes

Compatibility

Information on Core i3-9100F and Ryzen 9 3900X 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 configuration11 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFCLGA1151AM4
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i3-9100F and Ryzen 9 3900X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2no data
AES-NI++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
TSX-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+no data
SIPP-no data
StatusDiscontinuedno data

Security technologies

Core i3-9100F and Ryzen 9 3900X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data
Secure Key+no data
MPX+no data
Identity Protection+no data
SGXYes with Intel® MEno data
OS Guard+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i3-9100F and Ryzen 9 3900X 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 i3-9100F and Ryzen 9 3900X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR4 Dual-channel
Maximum memory size64 GB128 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth37.5 GB/s51.196 GB/s
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card--

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i3-9100F and Ryzen 9 3900X.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes16no data

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.

i3-9100F 4.36
Ryzen 9 3900X 21.11
+384%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Core i3-9100F by 384% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

i3-9100F 6743
Ryzen 9 3900X 32652
+384%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Core i3-9100F by 384% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

i3-9100F 1379
Ryzen 9 3900X 1694
+22.8%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Core i3-9100F by 23% in GeekBench 5 Single-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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

i3-9100F 3684
Ryzen 9 3900X 9922
+169%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Core i3-9100F by 169% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

i3-9100F 6509
+8.1%
Ryzen 9 3900X 6019

Core i3-9100F outperforms Ryzen 9 3900X by 8% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

i3-9100F 18118
Ryzen 9 3900X 45539
+151%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Core i3-9100F by 151% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

i3-9100F 11.81
Ryzen 9 3900X 2.69
+339%

Core i3-9100F outperforms Ryzen 9 3900X by 339% in wPrime 32.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

i3-9100F 5
Ryzen 9 3900X 34
+530%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Core i3-9100F by 530% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

i3-9100F 634
Ryzen 9 3900X 3049
+381%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Core i3-9100F by 381% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

i3-9100F 171
Ryzen 9 3900X 207
+21.1%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Core i3-9100F by 21% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

i3-9100F 1.95
Ryzen 9 3900X 2.36
+21%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Core i3-9100F by 21% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

i3-9100F 3
Ryzen 9 3900X 10.8
+258%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Core i3-9100F by 258% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

i3-9100F 4052
Ryzen 9 3900X 7534
+85.9%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Core i3-9100F by 86% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

i3-9100F 44
Ryzen 9 3900X 147
+231%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Core i3-9100F by 231% in x264 encoding pass 2.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

i3-9100F 218
Ryzen 9 3900X 268
+22.7%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Core i3-9100F by 23% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.36 21.11
Recency 23 April 2019 7 July 2019
Physical cores 4 12
Threads 4 24
Cost $122 $499
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 125 Watt

The Ryzen 9 3900X is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i3-9100F in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i3-9100F and Ryzen 9 3900X, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Core i3-9100F
Core i3-9100F
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X
Ryzen 9 3900X

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.2 6680 votes

Rate Core i3-9100F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.7 5022 votes

Rate Ryzen 9 3900X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i3-9100F or Ryzen 9 3900X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.