The Core i3-9100F Versus The Ryzen 5 1600 AF

Source: TechSpot The Core i3-9100F Versus The Ryzen 5 1600 AF

F’n’A, That’s A Drubbin’ If I’ve Ever Seen’t One

Pay attention featherweight fans, there is a challenge going down between Intel’s $82 Core i3-9100F and AMD’s $99 Ryzen 5 1600 AF over at TechSpot.   It would not be accurate to call this a battle, as you can tell from the first benchmarks that this is going to be an incredibly one sided contest.  Indeed the only win Intel could pull off in this value priced contest was the single core Cinebench R20 benchmark, the rest were no contest. 

Making matters worse for Intel at this price point is the fact that the Ryzen ships with a Wraith Stealth Cooler bundled in, and it is compatible with three generations of motherboard so prospective buyers have a huge amount of choice as to how much they want to spend on a motherboard.  Those choosing Intel will need to buy a cooler in addition to a motherboard; though they will end up with a system that requires less total power which could be attractive to some.

Having recently reviewed the Ryzen 5 1600 AF, you should know all there is to know about this nimble CPU. In short, it's an incredible value for less than $100, however there are some who say the Core i3-9100F is a better choice. It's also cheaper and more widely available, so let's discuss Intel's budget processor.

Video News

About The Author

Jeremy Hellstrom

Call it,, or PC Perspective, Jeremy has been hanging out and then working with the gang here for years. Apart from the front page you might find him on the BOINC Forums or possibly the Fraggin' Frogs if he has the time.


  1. KevinF

    The Intel build using less power? If I recall Intel’s tsp only takes into account it’s idle power draw, when it’s hitting boost clocks Intel’s newer processors tend to be quite the power hungry little units. Vs amd posting tdp’s more accurately representing what you user would see when testing a and equipped system.

    • Jeremy Hellstrom

      105W is less than 157W, but you can head over to TechSpot to tell them how wrong they are if you feel the need.

    • mkhairulafiq

      Techspot did the test on Blender Open Data Power consumption and yes i3-9100F does uses less power (105W) vs R5 1600 (157W). But that’s why we should always give more context than being a dick here like Jeremy did. The R5 have higher performance per watt. the R5 1600 uses 50% more power but was 85% faster. If you are looking for a performance budget rig, the R5 is a highly efficient chip when compared to the i3-9100F.

      In other words, the “i3-9100F uses less power” is only just a mere number and there is so much more to it than meets the eye.

      • Jeremy Hellstrom

        If the original comment had referenced efficiency rather than questioning the reference from the article about total measured power consumption I would have certainly agreed; it did not.

        Words matter when you are communicating via text only, else you end up falling off a wall.


Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest Podcasts

Archive & Timeline

Previous 12 months
Explore: All The Years!