OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

Intel Core i3-12100 review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£130PassMark multi-core score:12419N. of physical cores:4CPU boost clock speed:4.3 GHzCPU socket:LGA1700TDP (Thermal design power):60 W

Intel Core i3-12100 Review: Compare 74 technical specifications, 12 expert and video reviews and 1 best-of list to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

Intel Core i3-12100
6.7/10

Overall score

Score
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 51% of models
Score components

40%

6.1

Technical score

25%

8.4

Reviews score

25%

6.1

List score

10%

6.1

Sentiment score

▼Worse than 51% of processors
7.6

Value for money

Value for money
7.6/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 65% of models
Score components

70%

6.7

Overall score

30%

9.8

Price

▲Better than 65%
6.1

Technical score

Technical score
6.1/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 54% of models
Score components

60%

5.3

Performance

18%

6.7

Architecture

10%

8.3

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.9

Power & Thermal

4%

8.1

Platform

1%

7.2

Integrated graphics

▲Better than 54%
8.4

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.4/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 89% of models

80%

8.3

Average grade

20%

8.8

Popularity

Grades by review (12)
4 reviews: 2 with a printed score, 2 estimated from the review. 8 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
▲Better than 89%
6.1

List score

List score
6.1/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (1)
List score: in 1 of 87 lists (1%)
▲Better than 89%
  • intel-core-i3-12100
intel-core-i3-12100
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the Intel Core i3-12100

Based on 3 · 8

A great-value gaming chip that runs cool and efficiently, though multicore performance lags and overclocking isn't an option.
Praised
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the Intel Core i3-12100

Based on 42 owners sharing their experience in online comments

55%positive7%mixed38%negative

Owners generally praise its gaming performance and value, though some report low frame rates or stuttering.

What owners dislike

  • Some owners report low frame rates and stutters in demanding titles like Cyberpunk and GTA V, especially at higher settings or with slow RAM.9
  • Some owners say the PC powers on but shows no display, with several beeps on first start; one owner suspected a BIOS update was needed.4
  • Some owners say the stock cooler runs hot and needs replacing, with temperatures reaching about 80 degrees under load.3
  • Owners report the system slowing down or freezing while multitasking, such as with Chrome and Discord open alongside a game.3

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i3-12100

Technical score
Technical score
6.1/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 54% of models
Score components:

60%

5.3

Performance

18%

6.7

Architecture

10%

8.3

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.9

Power & Thermal

4%

8.1

Platform

1%

7.2

Integrated graphics

6.1
Reviews score
8.4
List score
6.1
Value for money
Value for money
7.6/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 65% of models
Score components:

70%

6.7

Overall score

30%

9.8

Price

7.6
Processor type
desktop
This processor belongs to the desktop processor class, which is more advanced than that of 54.7% of processors and equal to that of 39.5% of processors.
CPU socket
LGA1700
This processor uses the LGA1700 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 84.5% of processors and equal to that of 8.4% of processors.
Chipset
Z790, H770, B760, Z690, H670, B660, H610
This processor supports Z790, H770, B760, Z690, H670, B660, H610 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 84.5% of processors and equal to that of 1.2% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2
This processor supports SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 instruction sets, which is narrower support than 88.2% of processors and equal to that of 9.7% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
4
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 4 CPU cores, which is fewer than 52.8% of processors and equal to 27.5% of processors.
CPU threads
8
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 8 CPU threads, which is more than 33.4% of processors and equal to 18.8% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.3 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.3 GHz which is lower than that of 51.5% of processors and equal to that of 2.9% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
4x 3.3 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 4x3.3 GHz which is lower than that of 55.3% of processors and equal to that of 1.2% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
12,419
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 12,419 in PassMark, which is higher than 51.6% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Semiconductor size
10 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 10 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 50.8% of processors and equal to that of 19.5% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 7
This processor is built on the Intel 7 foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 64.8% of processors and equal to that of 15.7% of processors.
L3 cache
12 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 12 MB which is larger than that of 52% of processors and equal to that of 9.3% of processors.
L2 cache
5 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 5 MB which is larger than that of 62.9% of processors and equal to that of 2.5% of processors.
L1 cache
320 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 320 KB which is smaller than that of 56.1% of processors and equal to that of 4.2% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4/DDR5
This processor supports DDR DDR4/DDR5, which is newer than that of 77.1% of processors and equal to that of 10.7% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
4,800 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 4,800 MHz, which is higher than that of 64.6% of processors and equal to 6% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR5-4800 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR5-4800 MHz, which is higher than that of 62.3% of processors and equal to 6.7% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
?
Maximum memory capacity
128 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 128 GB of memory, which is more than 59.3% of processors and equal to 22.8% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
Intel UHD Graphics 730
This processor uses the Intel UHD Graphics 730 integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 54.4% of processors and equal to that in 2.1% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
24
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 24 GPU execution units, which is more than 49.1% of processors and equal to 20.8% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
300 MHz
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 300 MHz which is lower than that of 57.8% of processors and equal to that of 38.4% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
AV1 (HW decode)
This processor supports AV1 (HW decode) media codecs, which is narrower support than 61.3% of processors and equal to 10.3% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
60 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 60 W which is higher than that of 67.2% of processors and equal to that of 0.5% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
60 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 60 W which is higher than that of 67.3% of processors and equal to that of 0.4% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
89 W
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 89 W which is higher than that of 59% of processors and equal to that of 0.8% of processors.
Tau (power duration limit)
28 seconds
Market range: <8 seconds – >28 seconds
This processor has a turbo duration of 28 seconds which is longer than that of 4.4% of processors and equal to that of 85.3% of processors.
Configurable TDP
no
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 53.7% of processors offer this.
Show more
What reviewers say

Intel Core i3-12100 vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (5 + 4 vs 3).
    5.0 + 4.0 vs 3.0
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Alder Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Alder Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 2.5x more L2 per core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (1.3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    1.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 44.3% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,215 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,215 vs 1,535
  • 62.2% more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (3 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    3 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • Includes a cooler
    This processor includes a cooler, while the average processor does not. 26.9% of processors include a cooler.
  • 25.4% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.4/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▲ Better than 89% of models

    80%

    8.3

    Average grade

    20%

    8.8

    Popularity

    Grades by review (12)
    4 reviews: 2 with a printed score, 2 estimated from the review. 8 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.4 vs 6.7
  • 32.4% higher Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a higher Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (649 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    649 vs 490
  • 25.4% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.4/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▲ Better than 89% of models

    80%

    8.3

    Average grade

    20%

    8.8

    Popularity

    Grades by review (12)
    4 reviews: 2 with a printed score, 2 estimated from the review. 8 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.4 vs 6.7
  • Modern CPU socket
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA1700 vs FP5).
    LGA1700 vs FP5
  • 44.3% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,215 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,215 vs 1,535
  • 32.4% higher Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a higher Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (649 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    649 vs 490
  • 26% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,224 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,224 vs 2,558
  • 2.08x faster classroom rendering
    This processor has a lower Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (705.9 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    705.9 vs 340.075
  • 29.7% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (6,756 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    6,756 vs 5,209
  • 2x higher bus transfer rate
    This processor has a higher bus transfer rate than the average processor (16 GT/s vs 8 GT/s). The average processor offers bus transfer rate of 8 GT/s.
    16 GT/s vs 8 GT/s
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Alder Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Alder Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 2.5x more L2 per core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (1.3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    1.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 62.2% more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (3 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    3 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (Intel 7 vs Intel 14 nm).
    Intel 7 vs Intel 14 nm
  • 66.7% larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (5 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    5 MB vs 3 MB
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (5 + 4 vs 3).
    5.0 + 4.0 vs 3.0
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR4/DDR5 vs DDR4).
    DDR4/DDR5 vs DDR4
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 4 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (20 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    20 vs 16
  • 2x more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (128 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    128 GB vs 64 GB
  • 63.8% higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (76.8 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    76.8 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • 50% higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (4,800 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    4,800 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • 1 more supported displays
    This processor has more supported displays than the average processor (4 vs 3). The average processor supports 3 displays.
    4 vs 3
  • Includes a cooler
    This processor includes a cooler, while the average processor does not. 26.9% of processors include a cooler.
  • 21.8% lower list score
    List score
    6.1/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
    How we count it
    Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
    Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
    Lists with this model (1)
    List score: in 1 of 87 lists (1%)
    6.1 vs 7.8
  • 2 fewer CPU cores
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (4 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    4 vs 6
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • 33.3% higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (60 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    60 W vs 45 W
  • 15.3% lower sentiment score
    6.1 vs 7.2
  • 21.8% lower list score
    List score
    6.1/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
    How we count it
    Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
    Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
    Lists with this model (1)
    List score: in 1 of 87 lists (1%)
    6.1 vs 7.8
  • 15.3% lower sentiment score
    6.1 vs 7.2
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • 2 fewer CPU cores
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (4 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    4 vs 6
  • 2.3% lower boost clock
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (4.3 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4.3 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 33.3% higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (60 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    60 W vs 45 W
  • 39.1% higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (89 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    89 W vs 64 W
  • 33.3% higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (60 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    60 W vs 45 W

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

8.0
Proceu Tech
≈ estimated
30/08/2025
Hands-on review · clocks, memory, power and cooling tests
Verdict
Intel Core i3-12100 is an efficient, stable budget chip, though DDR4 memory above 2666 MT/s may fail to boot.
9.5
The Good Old Gamer (TheGoodOldGamer)
≈ estimated
25/05/2022
Long test · gaming comparison with a Ryzen 7 3700X
Verdict
Intel Core i3-12100 is the only CPU you need for gaming now, if you don't need extra cores.
9.0
Nicolas11x12 English
≈ estimated
05/03/2022
Hands-on review · gaming and productivity benchmarks
Verdict
Intel Core i3-12100 is a strong price-to-performance budget CPU, though it trails the Ryzen 5 5600X in productivity.
9.0
OC3D TV
≈ estimated
23/01/2022
Hands-on review · gaming tests and budget build
Verdict
Intel Core i3-12100 is a solid gaming chip for a tight budget, but limited for heavy multithreaded work.
Hands-on video, no verdict
Overview video
Overview video
Not graded
Not graded
Hands-on video, no verdict
Not graded
Not graded

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.0
tomshardware.com
✓ explicit
19/06/2022
Lab review · Quad-core gaming chip
Verdict
The Intel Core i3-12100 is a strong entry-level gaming chip, delivering 88% of the Core i5-12400's 1080p gaming speed, though its core clock can't be raised.
9.0
arstechnica.com
≈ estimated
01/04/2022
Benchmark review · Low-end desktop CPUs
Verdict
The Intel Core i3-12100 is a fast quad-core for browsing, office work and video calls, but its integrated graphics trail AMD's for light gaming.
8.0
clubic.com
✓ explicit
26/04/2022
Lab test · Alder Lake quad-core
Verdict
The Intel Core i3-12100 is a capable everyday and gaming chip with PCIe 5.0 and DDR5 support, but four cores limit heavy multi-core work and it can't be overclocked.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Core i3-12100

  • Excellent value for money and performance-to-price ratio for budget builds
  • Strong single-core performance that excels in gaming and daily desktop tasks
  • Highly power efficient with a low 60W TDP and minimal heat generation
  • Stock cooler is generally adequate for basic use and operates quietly under normal loads
  • Works well on both Windows 10 and Windows 11 without needing hybrid-core management
  • Great for home media servers and Plex transcoding due to the integrated UHD 730 graphics

What customers don't like about Intel Core i3-12100

  • Limited to 4 cores and 8 threads, which may impact future-proofing for heavy multitasking
  • Integrated graphics (UHD 730) are insufficient for modern AAA gaming or intensive 3D tasks
  • Lacks 'E-cores' found in higher-end 12th-gen chips, resulting in lower multi-core productivity performance
  • Locked multiplier means it cannot be traditionally overclocked for extra performance
  • Stock cooler can become noisy when the processor is under heavy sustained loads
  • Motherboard costs (LGA 1700) can sometimes offset the savings of this budget-tier CPU

Verdict

The Intel Core i3-12100 is an entry-level Alder Lake desktop processor featuring 4 Performance-cores and 8 threads with a 3.3 GHz base frequency and up to 4.3 GHz turbo boost. Built on the Intel 7 process, it includes 12 MB of Intel Smart Cache, supports both DDR4-3200 and DDR5-4800 memory, and features PCIe 5.0 and 4.0 connectivity with integrated Intel UHD Graphics 730. Its main advantages include exceptional price-to-performance for gaming, strong single-threaded efficiency, and low power consumption (60W TDP), though it is hindered by a lack of Efficient-cores, a locked multiplier that prevents overclocking, and limited multi-threaded performance for heavy production workloads like 3D rendering.

Compare Intel Core i3-12100 with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Intel Core i3-12100 and other processors

No results found