Core i3-9100F vs Ryzen 7 1700X

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

Ryzen 7 1700X
2017
8 cores / 16 threads
10.13
+132%

Ryzen 7 1700X outperforms Core i3-9100F by 132% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 7 1700X and Core i3-9100F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking6931261
Place by popularitynot in top-10048
Cost-effectiveness evaluation16.1515.90
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesAMD Ryzen 7Intel Core i3
Architecture codenameZen (2017−2020)Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019)
Release date2 March 2017 (7 years ago)23 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$399$122
Current price$148 (0.4x MSRP)$83 (0.7x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 7 1700X has 2% better value for money than i3-9100F.

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 7 1700X and Core i3-9100F 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads164
Base clock speed3.4 GHz3.6 GHz
Boost clock speed3.8 GHz4.2 GHz
L1 cache768 KB64K (per core)
L2 cache4096 KB256K (per core)
L3 cache16384 KB6 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Die size192 mm2126 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data72 °C
Number of transistors4,800 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierYesNo

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 7 1700X and Core i3-9100F 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketAM4FCLGA1151
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 7 1700X and Core i3-9100F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsXFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMTIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
FMAFMA3no data
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
TSXno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoringno data+
SIPPno data-
Statusno dataDiscontinued
XFR+no data
SenseMI+no data

Security technologies

Ryzen 7 1700X and Core i3-9100F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
MPXno data+
Identity Protectionno data+
SGXno dataYes with Intel® ME
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 7 1700X and Core i3-9100F are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 7 1700X and Core i3-9100F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR4
Maximum memory size64 GB64 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth42.671 GB/s37.5 GB/s
ECC memory supportno data+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card--

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 7 1700X and Core i3-9100F.

PCIe versionn/a3.0
PCI Express lanes2016

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.

Ryzen 7 1700X 10.13
+132%
i3-9100F 4.36

Ryzen 7 1700X outperforms Core i3-9100F by 132% 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%

Ryzen 7 1700X 15670
+132%
i3-9100F 6742

Ryzen 7 1700X outperforms Core i3-9100F by 132% 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%

Ryzen 7 1700X 1089
i3-9100F 1377
+26.4%

Core i3-9100F outperforms Ryzen 7 1700X by 26% 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%

Ryzen 7 1700X 5590
+51.9%
i3-9100F 3679

Ryzen 7 1700X outperforms Core i3-9100F by 52% 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%

Ryzen 7 1700X 4662
i3-9100F 6509
+39.6%

Core i3-9100F outperforms Ryzen 7 1700X by 40% 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%

Ryzen 7 1700X 31950
+76.3%
i3-9100F 18118

Ryzen 7 1700X outperforms Core i3-9100F by 76% 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%

Ryzen 7 1700X 4.89
+142%
i3-9100F 11.81

Core i3-9100F outperforms Ryzen 7 1700X by 142% 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%

Ryzen 7 1700X 17
+215%
i3-9100F 5

Ryzen 7 1700X outperforms Core i3-9100F by 215% 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%

Ryzen 7 1700X 1537
+142%
i3-9100F 634

Ryzen 7 1700X outperforms Core i3-9100F by 142% 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%

Ryzen 7 1700X 154
i3-9100F 171
+11%

Core i3-9100F outperforms Ryzen 7 1700X by 11% 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%

Ryzen 7 1700X 1.73
i3-9100F 1.95
+12.7%

Core i3-9100F outperforms Ryzen 7 1700X by 13% 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%

Ryzen 7 1700X 9
+198%
i3-9100F 3

Ryzen 7 1700X outperforms Core i3-9100F by 198% 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%

Ryzen 7 1700X 3728
i3-9100F 4052
+8.7%

Core i3-9100F outperforms Ryzen 7 1700X by 9% in WinRAR 4.0.

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%

Ryzen 7 1700X 180
i3-9100F 218
+21.1%

Core i3-9100F outperforms Ryzen 7 1700X by 21% in x264 encoding pass 1.

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%

Ryzen 7 1700X 90
+103%
i3-9100F 44

Ryzen 7 1700X outperforms Core i3-9100F by 103% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.13 4.36
Recency 2 March 2017 23 April 2019
Physical cores 8 4
Threads 16 4
Cost $399 $122
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 65 Watt

The Ryzen 7 1700X is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i3-9100F in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 7 1700X and Core i3-9100F, 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.


AMD Ryzen 7 1700X
Ryzen 7 1700X
Intel Core i3-9100F
Core i3-9100F

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.


4.3 691 vote

Rate Ryzen 7 1700X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 6637 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 7 1700X or Core i3-9100F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.