@@owieOne I'd try overclocking the 3100 first. It makes a considerable difference, provided your motherboard is set up to do it and provided your CPU cooler is good enough. You don't need a monster cooler, but the stock cooler definitely won't cut it. A good $35 air tower should be fine. The 5000 series chips are definitely an improvement, but your present motherboard may need a bios update to support them, or may not be able to support them at all. I went from the R3 3100 to the R9 5950X, and of course there's absolutely no comparison. But even the R5 5500 should blow the 3100 out of the water, if only because it has two more cores. The 3100 is a budget chip, but it's a really good budget chip - better than the 4100.
@@owieOne you should overclock and undervolt it a bit without losing performance. check the CPU temps, your CPU temperature should generally be below 80C if you want it to be more safe. 85C and more will increase degradation considerably, since it's a 7nm chip, and the smaller the node is, the faster it will degrade at more than 85C. And yes, if you are thinking of an upgrade, get only the 5600 and nothing more, nothing less (unless yours is a solid B450 board with good VRMs to power 8 core chips, which it probably is not, since you're using a budget 3100)
The paltry amount of L3 cache suggests that this is probably a 4300G with its integrated graphics disabled, even the 3100 had 16MB. And the 3100 was slightly worse than the i3-10100 in most cases so yeah this is kind of a DOA CPU
Absolutely. It makes me think of the old adage (paraphrasing) "...No such thing as a bad product. Just bad marketing". For a company that wants to position itself as a market leader the 4100 makes AMD look weak. It also shows how little they think of the budget market. If AMD went 4c/8th with Athlon people would be praising AMD for moving the market forward. They could've charged a little less, called it Athlon, and raked in some good PR. Instead we have a company that seems to despise budget/low-end. The 6500XT wasn't charity. It was a table scrap. Hopefully Intel sorts out driver issues for their eventual cards.
@@Dick_Valparaiso AMD doesn't need good PR from a low-end chip. They get more than enough PR from their high-end chips. There is a reason they are called "halo products".
@@LePedant Nobody's arguing AMD doesn't make great tech. I'll also point you back to my original comment where I brought up, "No such thing as a bad product. Just bad marketing (pricing)." Nobody in this thread is calling for AMD to be a charity either. However, to "gift" us with products like the 6500 XT and 4100 come off more as insults. Sure, people new to tech or those with little knowledge may have no problem buying these things. But, for those of us who've watched and supported AMD well before their current boom. Many of us who remember switching from a K6 to Athlon, or getting a new ATI card. Most of all, you've got the majority of customers who know what they want and how much a product is worth. In what world does a person with this basic product knowledge *not* take AMD's marketing as an insult? We're actually seeing performance regression in certain products. Products that if were marketed a little differently would likely be better received. Again, AMD has, and I'm sure, will continue to make great products. But, neglecting a key demographic only to placate with such a shoddy lineup this late in the generation reeks of complacency. The last time I checked complacency wasn't something a company worth a fraction of their competitors could afford. Just look at what it did to Intel and may be doing to Nvidia atm. Even if things really go south for either company they still have the coffers to cover the damage. AMD are still a long way from having that kind of financial cushion. I'll finish this novel by mentioning just how well the Ryzen 5 1600 AF was received. 6c/12th for $85 in 2018. AMD took their table scraps and turned them into a feast. I'd bet almost every person who scored a 1600 AF are likely still on AM4. The 1600 AF was great PR. It earned some serious customer goodwill while expanding AMD's platform. Overall, a great stroke of ingenuity that I hope to see AMD replicate again.
have you ever looked at how they used poor quality chips as lower tier chips? there are several instances in their production lineups that end up with cutdown cpus skus
The 4100 is an APU with the graphics disabled. Hence less cache and even worse performance than even a 3100. As for why: Getting rid of old stock I'd imagine. Or the 4000 series notebooks don't sell anymore.
This thing would be a good buy at about $70 for people still on the Ryzen 1200 who are still on a very tight budget. At $99 it feels like a scam to me, as the owner of a $95(in 2020) 3.8ghz 1600AF which scores over 600pts more in R20 multi-core and has 4x the L3 cache size.
Still got a 1200 in one of my pc, but truth is I can grab a ryzen 2600 for 50 euros. Which will be more or less the same as this chip. So if I have to upgrade without spending a lot, that would be my direct pick
@@ludapecurka102 It's just a slightly downclocked 2600. It's fine for most titles and if you got it for $85, then it was the steal of the decade. I wish there was a nice cheap successor for it around $110. Maybe a 3600AF?
I must stress this if you don't plan to overclock the r3 3100 is better for higher fps gaming At least in apex legends Hell the 1600af can drop down to 60s when not tuned, where my luck with the 3100 has been better out of the box it never dropped to 60 and sat closer to 100 most of the time however both aren't amazing chips if you want a stable 150hz in apex you'll need the R5 5600 or equivalent
AMD motherboards are still cheaper than Intel MBs, so you could get one of these, pair it with second hand 1050 ti or 1650, and still play modern AAA games at 1080p low. As for 6400, well, perhaps. Performance is worse than on PCIe 4.0 but is not so bad if you only use 1080p low or med.
I wonder if AMD was trying to make this an upgrade path from 1st gen ryzen. I’d love to see a comparison of this chip to a r3 1200. Great video as usual.
It is exactly what I did: I bought an oem 4100 for a very good price and I am happy with the result. It is not a big leap for many but going from a 1200 to this one is, in my opinion
Yea ever since they released the 1600af at 85, they can never really match the value they've had, especially with the current market. Makes this look bad. I bought a used 3600x for 110 local. I'd go that route
Exactly why not just go with a previous generation cpu that does better on everything? No need imo to use current generation if the spec is mediocre in comparison
@@RandomGaminginHD Still using one to this day in my VR PC with a 1080ti. Picked it up for around 130 USD here which was easily 1/4 the cost of the next best CPU at the time, the 3600.
@@Madchris8828 only problem is, prices have gone up on older Ryzen, especially 1st and 2nd gen. that didn't used to be the case with AMD, but that shows you how good they hold there value now. for the longest time Intel dominated the market, until AMD finally put out a product that challenged them. but i don't see this being a bad chip, it's just that the 4100 is basically a refresh 3100. so it's probably a hold over CPU until they come out with a new version. im still on 2nd gen Ryzen and i don't see a need to upgrade, though i will say thanks to AMD, Intel has been putting out some pretty impressive stuff since 2021. i had a Intel build, the i5 3570, an older chip these days, but man that thing lasted me a long time, until i bought the Ryzen. i had a gtx 770 for awhile, then i upgraded to 1660 and im looking at maybe getting a new card.
The 4100 is simply AMD making use of APUs that have failed GPUs as a 4c/8t CPU. That's why there's only PCIe 3 support. It's a somewhat smart move for AMD from the perspective of being able to sell a low cost product from chips that would otherwise end up as e-waste. From a consumer POV it is a disappointment even more so when you compare it to the i3 12100F. AMD is still more mfg. capacity limited than Intel, so long as that exists AMD is going to focus on selling higher end or higher margin silicon whenever they can so long as the Zen architecture remains competitive.
That has been a tried and tested process with AMD for decades. Their single-core Sempron 145 CPUs were actually dual-core Athlon X II CPUs with a defective core, rebadged in order to avoid wasting an otherwise usable component. Some motherboards had the ability to unlock the defective core, thus granting a free upgrade in lieu of potential processor lifetime; I have had several MoBos and Sempron 145s and always try doing this, when building rigs out of them: sometimes it works, sometimes it's quite unstable, so I have had to revert it to single-core operation.
You can't even compare this to the 10100F anyways. That cpu has gone as low as 70 bucks, and b460 boards have been as cheap as 70 bucks as well. This cpu is 4 years too late and shows how arrogant AMD is for thinking putting these "budget" cpus on the market at these prices.
Why AMD the most "pro consumer" company did this bullshit? Its simple, AMD is just typical cash grab company where they try so hard to maximize their profit from selling garbage products because Lisa aka AMD ceo know their stupid fanboy will still buy those cashgrab garbage products even though there are much better alternative like what Intel has like i3-12100F. Its sad to see people keep overhyping AMD but those stupid people is nothing more than blinded sheep who buy products because of the brand.
Because it wouldn't do what they want for them. The products they have right now kill 2 birds with one stone: they fill the price range and recycle failed APUs into sellable products. A hypothetical 5300x doesn't fit anywhere as it would have to be priced somewhere around where the 4500 currently is while being decently better performing.
Not great from AMD's messy production point of view. It requires chiplets with half their cores being defective, which is a no - go for AMD. See how the 3100 and 3300X were impossible to find once they sold out? That's because all defective DIEs were sold, so only a few to be collected afterwards. Given the current constraints AMD is facing with TSMC 7 nm, they just can't release a massively succesful low end CPU without dragging the whole lineup into shortages . Let's hope the 5 nm production lines are better prepared so we get a R3 7300(X) and athlon 7x00, with possible APU variants.
Why AMD the most "pro consumer" company did this bullshit? Its simple, AMD is just typical cash grab company where they try so hard to maximize their profit from selling garbage products because Lisa aka AMD ceo know their stupid fanboy will still buy those cashgrab garbage products even though there are much better alternative like what Intel has like i3-12100F. Its sad to see people keep overhyping AMD but those stupid people is nothing more than blinded sheep who buy products because of the brand.
AMD has limited silicon wafers and those are naturally going to their high-margin products like server hardware, HEDT and GPUs, so right now the only way they can offer something for consumers is by recycling discarded dies (APU's with defective iGPU's). Intel is desperate to not let the foundries and tooling they invested billions on sit idle (Losing resale value is literally burning money), and to take back marketshare from AMD, so they can go for lower margins and try to regain consumer trust. So yeah if you need budget hardware right now Intel is the way to go.
@@vollhorst140 AMD does have limited wafers, commonly reuses chiplets (die) of lower speced parts. Intel is literally wasting money letting brand new fabs idle, they might as well produce something with that tooling they spent billions on.
@@donovan6320 sources? I haven’t heard of intel fabs being idle. You know someone needs to serve dell and hp millions of low price CPU’s for millions of office PCs.
@@vollhorst140 no, what he's saying is that they need to produce as many chips as they can Feasibly. He's not saying they're fabs are idle. He's saying they need to be at peak production because anything that isn't at peak is costing them loads of money. Loads of it, so ANY excuse to use the fabs for ANY product that can bring in money is money well spent, even if profit margins are low.
Not if you are already invested in AMD, though. I briefly considered building a 12400F until I realized a 5600X was an equivalent, drop in upgrade for $220 with tax. It was the only thing I had to buy. And then, there was no way I was going to buy an expensive motherboard I have to live with for the next 3-5 years to justify the purchase with DDR4 so I would have had to go with DDR5 even though it doesn't yet exceed the performance of DDR4. In the near future it will. So I would be buying DDR5 now and again in a couple of years when I can get better bandwidth from it, as well as upgrading to a 12th gen i7 or i9. It all adds up when I can just drop in a CPU upgrade and wait a couple of years to see how this very unstable market works out. If you have an older Ryzen on a B450 MB, going with intel right now would be a complete waste of money.
I also got 'scammed' into thinking 4000 series is better than 3000 series, i'm planning to upgrade my 4100 to 3100 so i can utilize my pcie4 on rx 6400
As a happy user of a Ryzen 3 3100 (bought it new with B550 mobo , 16GB(2x8) 3200mhz memory , new case , some extra fans and new 750W PSU for ~330£ two years ago) I had a good laugh when I read the specs of the 4100 for the first time.
The only way the 4100 even deserves a chance compared to the 12100(f) is if for some reason someone was really adamant about not using Intel. I can literally find the 12100f for less than $10 over the 4100 on Newegg right now. Add on that their are LGA 1700 motherboards with under 80-90 that support ddr4 and the total difference is probably not more than $30 between the two. I get that prices will vary depending on location, but those who live where I do, which is the US. Not to mention the better upgrade path in the foreseeable future with Raptor lake likely being compatible with the mobo while AM4 is currently seeing their last releases.
Just ended up buying this chip as it was on sale for $69 at Amazon and Newegg. Don't need it to be crazy good, just have a spare 980 and a spare new am4 board , bought this chip, a cheap case, and 16gb ddr4 for around $160 total. So I'm not complaining Also for others suggesting I shouldn't have (sorry used to constant arguing on the internet) This will not be my main pc, this is my fourth. Main: i9-9900k + Rtx 3060 ti Wife's pc: i7-4770k @4.5ghz+980 ti Living room pc: asrock deskmini x300 ryzen 5 5600g 16gb 3200mhz ddr4 This pc will be Bedroom TV pc: Ryzen 3 4100 +gtx980 16gb 2133 ddr4
I ran into this CPU when browsing online and boy am I surprised, I'm happy with my 3300x for almost the same price in my place. lol hahaha. Ryzen 3 3300X costs about 110 pounds while the 4100 costs about 100 pounds.
The point you make near the end about upgrading from an older Ryzen is sooo good. It's better to spend the same amount of money for a used 2600 or anything used to upgrade your AM4 system than the 4100. In fact,I have a friend who owns a R3 1200 system and he considers upgrading within the next few months. My advice would either be a 3600 or 2700 for around 100€ or if he he wants to spend less, a 1600af/2600 of 3100 for around 60-80€ . IF the 4100 goes down to around 50-60€ perhaps I would recommend it. It doesn't worth more than that. To be honest if it was name 4300G or 4100G and it had integrated graphics a cost of around 80-90€ could be considered somewhat reasonable.
This R3 4100 performs worse than my R3 3300X. Just due to the fact that its based on an APU rather than it just being a CPU. Also, 1:55 What the hell happened there!?
I understand GPU performance by itself, but it's hard for me to understand CPU performance unless it's compared to other familiar CPUs. This is because I don't play any games that are commonly benchmarked
Hot take, cpu doesn't really matter for games as long as it's 4c/8t and you have the gpu power to stick to 1440p. I commonly build 4790 and 3770 refurb systems with 3060ti+ gpus to keep customer cost as little as possible and there's really no difference to a 12400 or 5600x as long as the game stays gpu bound. The exceptions are very obvious ones, like map games, and the type of people invested in those usually want 5800x+ tier cpu power for other things anyways.
@@joemarais7683 I heavily disagree, because the AMD FX-9590 is an 8 core 8 thread CPU, but it is severely underpowered compared to my Ryzen 5 3500 with 6 cores and 6 threads. Also the 9590 has outdated instructions
@@beavatatlan Well the most demanding games that I play are Planet Coaster, The Sims 4, BeamNG Drive, Sonic Generations and Just Cause 4. Most other games I play are either Valve games or other random stuff
Thanks for the great benchmarks! I disagree with the notion that this class of CPU is not good to pair with a 2080 Super class GPU. If someone is looking for 4k 60fps at the best price available, a similar pairing may be a good option if the price is right.
I recently upgraded from my fx9590 and wanted to stick to and and get onto AM4 for as cheap as possible while actually upgrading my system and so far I am quite happy with the cpu and the whole platform everything feels so much smoother and sure it doesn’t give me a lot more fps in games but there’s a nice improvement also I won’t be paying as much for electricity
in this case you re presenting, the 4100 paired with the 2080super, which less likely for someone to pair, would be best to be tested at 1440p res, would take the load off de cpu a bit more
I wonder how many 1200/1400/2200g/2400g + 570/580/1060 based rigs are still kicking around that could use this as an upgrade, but a used 3600 would be a better investment for a little extra cash.
From Denmark. Hi there, nice site you have and you come up with many funny things with older cases, that's good. You tested the Ryzen 3 4100 and of course it's not a super processor. But here in Denmark, where we have the world's highest taxation and 25% VAT for the state on all goods, it now costs only 509 kroner, which is equal to 73 dollars og equal to 60 pund. And in terms of price performance, I think it is a really good processor, although it is a 4/8 where the ryzen 1200 was a 4/4, so it is far more powerful than a Ryzen 1200.
It's sad how quickly AMD is trying to essentially destroy the sense of goodwill they had built up over the last 5 years since Ryzen launched. The 4000 series budget CPUs and lower end RX 6000 GPUs are another league of disappointing. At least I see a lot of 6600s for dirt cheap on eBay now compared to the MSRP, that has me tempted, but nothing else that they've put out in the last year or so has been particularly exciting aside from maybe the 5800X3D.
The GPU side of things is the most strange to me. For the 6500 XT (and probably the 6400 too) they slapped a laptop GPU onto a desktop board, which came with the side effect of having a paltry amount of PCIE bandwidth and a pathetic 64bit memory bus. Performing the same or worse than much older GPUs (6400 vs 1050ti and 6500 XT vs RX 580/5500 XT) for the same or higher prices is impossible to find excuses for. This is only if your system has sufficient PCIE version support too, otherwise you lose performance and essentially waste some of the GPU's actual potential. Continuing on with that, I'm fairly sure those low end APU based 4000/5000 CPUs also only support PCIE 3.0, essentially cutting away performance from AMD's own 6400 and 6500 XT. It's all just baffling to me.
me with i3 12100f & rx 6500xt is good right now. just a little problem that i still using 1 stick of ram and dont know what low budget game capture card to buy... 🤷🏽♂️
I'm pretty happy with it. My old 4690k gave up the ghost, and had to get something ASAP on a broke budget. i3 is the clear winner, but sadly it's more expensive here in Finland.
I've never built a PC before. I have a tight budget of 200usd. for everything. Case, GPU< CPU, MOtherboard. I think it will be slightly more than 200 but a CPU like this in my eyes is a dream.. Its always disheartenning when experienced pc builders who can buy and trade parts easily, bash the components you're looking at. I am only going to play Genshin impact so 4.0 ghz with a gtx 1650 seems like heaven
Barely above 60fps in an old game like GTA V sometimes - that's quite sad. Although it's not a bad CPU per se, the price is ridiculous, too. This kind of performance should come from a 50$ part by now.
Yeah, 4100 will only make sense if you can get it for a good price, it is not bad, though a bit of stepback or sidegrade to what it was supposed to replaced. I got one for my second build, sff, it is a good little cpu. got one for $70 on a clearance sale from where I am,
From price point alone it's such a pointless CPU considering the 10th gen parts are cheaper, even the motherboards are cheaper on socket 1200. You could get an i5 system with a 10400f and b560 board giving the same ram overclocking ability and more performance for less money overall. AMD are continuing to dissapoint me, ever since the launch of 5000 series they have been money grabbing and offering very little in the market section that made them successful
I bought a 4100 a few months back as a quick stop gap after the old 1600x in my living room PC went pop, it's mainly used as a Genshin Impact box for my daughter and as a Kodi/media player. I seriously have no complaints, it does everything I need it to do and for the £59.99 I paid for it on Amazon it's been a bargain, it's currently paired with 16gb 3200 DDR4 and an RX580 which is showing it's age with newer games but it'll play Ratchet & Clank, RDR 2 and others at 60 if you don't mind playing with the settings.. I really need to upgrade that GPU..
I'm not sure what the price is in the UK but the 4100 is on sale for slightly under $70 in the US. This finally made me pull the trigger on one of these and I was able to make a sub $330 PC. (not including a case, because I had one lying around, or graphics card)
Difference is this will fit in a 40-50 buck ddr4 board and will take a 65w 5700x if required as an upgrade path . That in mind the Intel isint 20 bucks more it's 150-200 more overall
comparisons should actually be between previous gen AM4 and a 4100 as people will be looking at upgrade options. I dont see value of comparing to intel only as that is a new build scenario, and is mostly academic. People who care about 4100 definitely will want to use existing motherboards and likely trying to estimate their upgrade path and are running athlon 3100 or 3200G or less
The best option with this chip is getting it in a motherboard/ram kit to get you started. Maybe you budgeted all the money towards a nicer GPU, this is a solid starter build. Buy a decent case and PSU and a cheap SSD and you're ready to go. You can eventually upgrade to a R7 or R9 later on. You could also get a decent RX 6600 or GT, or 6650 or a RTX 3060 TI to pair nicely with this. You spent the budget on a GPU so you just need to be able to play with it. I spent 3 months saving up to build the rest of the PC watching my new GPU sitting in a box being a literal paper weight.
I was going to look at 7'ing my Ryzen 5 but talking with a chap who crunches numbers and stuff he said in reality I would see very little material gain from apps and games and that my current setup is good for some years to come. So the only thing now is to sort out a new PSU as this one is getting old and I do want to get a Thermaltake laminated glass case that I can mount on the wall and make look funky fresh so there might be a Coolermaster HAF XM up on ebay sometime soon ;)
If you want this kind performance with a cheap mainboard perhaps the 10105F is an option also? Try finding a sale of a socket 1200 mainboard for that somewhere. BTW AM4 and socket 1200 wont get the most out an pci-e 4.0 optimized gpu like the 6400XT or the 6500XT. That may be a good consideration to go for the still expensive socket 1700 mainboard and a i3 12100F
This video has a whole new context when you realize it's the EXACT same spec as the steam deck's shitty 4c/8t 4MB cache 3.5GHz cpu. This configuration performs shockingly well given the mildly higher clocks. Maybe it has something to do with the memory configuration.
AMD motherboards are still cheaper than Intel MBs, so you could get one of these, pair it with second hand 1050 ti or 1650, and still play modern AAA games at 1080p low. As for 6400, well, perhaps. Performance is worse than on PCIe 4.0 but is not so bad if you only use 1080p low or med.
amd mobos is still not way cheaper than intel 10th gen and 11th gen mobos, as they are basically evened out in price, while pcie 4.0 will make this 4100 vomits in blood
I can't imagine AMD is going to sell very many of these. It would be fine for an office PC, except it doesn't have an IGP. And IGP's are critical for making office PCs as cheap as possible. I know that AMD is planning on putting an IGP in most of their CPUs like Intel does, so once they do that, that is where they should use all their lowest binned chiplets. I didn't know about the change in cache amounts so that was surprising to hear. But for office PCs that doesn't really matter. IMHO dual core CPUs need to be killed off NOW; even an office PC does enough to utilize a quad core these days; it just doesn't have to be a monster of a quad core to do it. ;-)
Just finished building and running my gaming PC thru standard benchmark programs, and I am actually wondering how come my Cinebench score for the Ryzen 3 4100 seemed far better than the one you posted here? My Cinebench R23 score posted the following for my Ryzen 3 4100: - Multi Core: 5786 - Single Core: 1101 Your Cinebench R20 results: - Multi Core: 2272 - Single Core: 446 This video made it seem that the Ryzen 3 4100 is running far more worse than how I saw in person. I dunno how you got those scores tho, but my PC rig certainly isn’t posting the same horrible Cinebench results.
I wouldn't be a bad value product if it is priced at $70 or lower. Also, it shouldn't be called Ryzen. This level of performance for nowadays only deserves the name of Athlon, not Ryzen.
I think the only viable use for the R3 4100 is for a lower end custom PC that isn't intended for any serious gaming. Maybe just general uses like browsing, light video editing (if paired with some kind of decent/cheap gpu) and it's a readily available, in socket-upgrade for someone using a R3 1200 or R5 1400--though I'd personally go for a used R5 2600 or 1600AF seeing as there's way more multi-core performance and similar single core for around the same price. Those types of scenarios *do* exist, and it makes sense for AMD to repurpose parts that would've otherwise gone to the landfill. Though from an enthusiast perspective, it definitely feels like regression in terms of performance per dollar compared to previous gen & the competition. AM5/Zen4 will hopefully offer more compelling R3 SKUs...maybe.
@Katinggangseng only if you want to keep the majoriy of the hardware, if your going big and new you might as well throw down, but i agree with your statement unless your going for 144+ fps consistantly you should just max your platform rather than dump a shitton of money at for minimal improvements in Competitive esport titles
PCIE 3 is fine for a chip like this, you're not gonna lose any performance from the cards that are going to reasonably be paired with this as the CPU will be the bottleneck, not the PCIE. It's a nice little budget CPU for those that only have £85 to spend.
@Antares 8001 would like to see actual real world limitations people speak of, because if your buying a 4100/6500xt new, im pretty sure your aiming for more than 60 fps and these products are quickly removed from your look into hardware.
I recently got one on sale for just $60 in my country, and quite honestly, the difference in price between this CPU and the Intel 12100F is significant enough that I can literally buy a Corsair 550W PSU or get a 16GB DDR4 RAM set. Add the fact that most mobos with decent heatsinks for gaming that will work for the Intel 12100F is also significantly more expensive than a decent B450M mobo for this CPU. So for me, going for this CPU instead of the more "better" Intel 12100F seemed a much sensible choice considering I'm on a tight budget.
last year 4100 was better priced than 4500 but kinda odd in southeast asia right now 4500 dropped prices lately I got R5 4500 and Msi B450 combo brand new just for $100 during a flash sale while R3 4100 is still remains it original price
I guess the only plus point of this is on a very tight budget as it can be paired with a cheap A320/B450 with appropriate bios for £30-£40 and still give an upgrade path to more powerful CPU's. 12100 is a great budget CPU for £100, but even an H610 board is £75. I'd personally pay the £50-60 price difference for the Intel platform, especially when you consider overall system cost which is probably only 10% price difference for 30% more performance potential with more powerful GPUs
Even the most demanding games reached more than 60 fps average, so I don't understand people's complaining. Not so long long ago for this price you could get CPUs adequate for GTA SA... Today's low budget, but not fully entry level chips are actually more than decent.
It would be interesting to compare it to a 1600/1600AF or 2600, as those chips should be even cheaper than it on the 2nd hand market and should perform a lot better. They just seem to be selling off excess stock from their APU's, with the graphics disabled. Those used to be cheap bargain parts like the Athlon X4 740, and now they try and fob them off as "normal" low end chips.
Funny to think that 'upgrading' from a 3100 to a 4100 is a step back.
Rx 5500xt to Rx 6500xt is step back too.
@@kvetinky core count yes. Actual performance maybe
@@kvetinky not really its 1% faster use less power but pci 4.0 4x so it suck on old platforms and no stream possibilities nervermind it's worst lol 😂
How is it a step back?
@@maaax1173 it’s very unstable with PCIe 3.0
I used to use its older brother, the Ryzen 3 3100. A great chip for the price, and it overclocked to 4.4GHz on all cores quite easily.
Still using it without oc. If I have the budget should I upgrade to something like a ryzen 5 5500
it's an overclocking beast. but the dual ccx design just punished it too much. i overclocked mine 4.6ghz for fun and only barely match a stock 3300x.
@@owieOne Nah go for a 5600 non-X instead if you can.
@@owieOne I'd try overclocking the 3100 first. It makes a considerable difference, provided your motherboard is set up to do it and provided your CPU cooler is good enough. You don't need a monster cooler, but the stock cooler definitely won't cut it. A good $35 air tower should be fine.
The 5000 series chips are definitely an improvement, but your present motherboard may need a bios update to support them, or may not be able to support them at all. I went from the R3 3100 to the R9 5950X, and of course there's absolutely no comparison. But even the R5 5500 should blow the 3100 out of the water, if only because it has two more cores. The 3100 is a budget chip, but it's a really good budget chip - better than the 4100.
@@owieOne you should overclock and undervolt it a bit without losing performance. check the CPU temps, your CPU temperature should generally be below 80C if you want it to be more safe. 85C and more will increase degradation considerably, since it's a 7nm chip, and the smaller the node is, the faster it will degrade at more than 85C.
And yes, if you are thinking of an upgrade, get only the 5600 and nothing more, nothing less (unless yours is a solid B450 board with good VRMs to power 8 core chips, which it probably is not, since you're using a budget 3100)
The paltry amount of L3 cache suggests that this is probably a 4300G with its integrated graphics disabled, even the 3100 had 16MB. And the 3100 was slightly worse than the i3-10100 in most cases so yeah this is kind of a DOA CPU
Yeah I don’t understand the reduced cache either haha
@@RandomGaminginHD It's based on Renoir. Definitely came out a year too late :)
for some one like me whos still on phenom a mobo ram combo with this cpu slots right in to my price point ..plus from phenom 2 to this its all gains.
My i5 7400 have 6 MB L3 and it still good
Yeah this is Renoir so the Monolithic APU Design, where as 3100/3300X was Chiplet design so the Core Cache structure is different
I feel like if they named this Athlon and sold it for under $70 it would've been a hit.
Absolutely. It makes me think of the old adage (paraphrasing) "...No such thing as a bad product. Just bad marketing".
For a company that wants to position itself as a market leader the 4100 makes AMD look weak. It also shows how little they think of the budget market.
If AMD went 4c/8th with Athlon people would be praising AMD for moving the market forward. They could've charged a little less, called it Athlon, and raked in some good PR.
Instead we have a company that seems to despise budget/low-end. The 6500XT wasn't charity. It was a table scrap. Hopefully Intel sorts out driver issues for their eventual cards.
@@Dick_Valparaiso cards are gonna be a fail unless they price them very low though
@@Dick_Valparaiso AMD doesn't need good PR from a low-end chip. They get more than enough PR from their high-end chips. There is a reason they are called "halo products".
AMD is a business, not a charity. If they can sell a chip for $99, they will sell the chip for $99.
@@LePedant Nobody's arguing AMD doesn't make great tech. I'll also point you back to my original comment where I brought up, "No such thing as a bad product. Just bad marketing (pricing)."
Nobody in this thread is calling for AMD to be a charity either. However, to "gift" us with products like the 6500 XT and 4100 come off more as insults. Sure, people new to tech or those with little knowledge may have no problem buying these things. But, for those of us who've watched and supported AMD well before their current boom. Many of us who remember switching from a K6 to Athlon, or getting a new ATI card. Most of all, you've got the majority of customers who know what they want and how much a product is worth. In what world does a person with this basic product knowledge *not* take AMD's marketing as an insult? We're actually seeing performance regression in certain products. Products that if were marketed a little differently would likely be better received.
Again, AMD has, and I'm sure, will continue to make great products. But, neglecting a key demographic only to placate with such a shoddy lineup this late in the generation reeks of complacency.
The last time I checked complacency wasn't something a company worth a fraction of their competitors could afford. Just look at what it did to Intel and may be doing to Nvidia atm. Even if things really go south for either company they still have the coffers to cover the damage. AMD are still a long way from having that kind of financial cushion.
I'll finish this novel by mentioning just how well the Ryzen 5 1600 AF was received. 6c/12th for $85 in 2018. AMD took their table scraps and turned them into a feast. I'd bet almost every person who scored a 1600 AF are likely still on AM4. The 1600 AF was great PR. It earned some serious customer goodwill while expanding AMD's platform. Overall, a great stroke of ingenuity that I hope to see AMD replicate again.
This seems worse than the 3100. Whats with AMD releasing products that are worse than their predeccessors? First the radeon 6500 vs 5500, now this
have you ever looked at how they used poor quality chips as lower tier chips? there are several instances in their production lineups that end up with cutdown cpus skus
I guess that they want to be overtaken by intel again
@@mikeymaiku That's... normal? It's called binning.
The 4100 is an APU with the graphics disabled. Hence less cache and even worse performance than even a 3100.
As for why: Getting rid of old stock I'd imagine. Or the 4000 series notebooks don't sell anymore.
and 6750XT vs 6800 too. basically the worse card for effectively same price in same generation
This thing would be a good buy at about $70 for people still on the Ryzen 1200 who are still on a very tight budget. At $99 it feels like a scam to me, as the owner of a $95(in 2020) 3.8ghz 1600AF which scores over 600pts more in R20 multi-core and has 4x the L3 cache size.
Still got a 1200 in one of my pc, but truth is I can grab a ryzen 2600 for 50 euros. Which will be more or less the same as this chip. So if I have to upgrade without spending a lot, that would be my direct pick
1600af has a nice score but is slow in games
@@ludapecurka102 It's just a slightly downclocked 2600. It's fine for most titles and if you got it for $85, then it was the steal of the decade. I wish there was a nice cheap successor for it around $110. Maybe a 3600AF?
I must stress this if you don't plan to overclock the r3 3100 is better for higher fps gaming
At least in apex legends
Hell the 1600af can drop down to 60s when not tuned, where my luck with the 3100 has been better out of the box it never dropped to 60 and sat closer to 100 most of the time however both aren't amazing chips if you want a stable 150hz in apex you'll need the R5 5600 or equivalent
AMD motherboards are still cheaper than Intel MBs, so you could get one of these, pair it with second hand 1050 ti or 1650, and still play modern AAA games at 1080p low. As for 6400, well, perhaps. Performance is worse than on PCIe 4.0 but is not so bad if you only use 1080p low or med.
I wonder if AMD was trying to make this an upgrade path from 1st gen ryzen. I’d love to see a comparison of this chip to a r3 1200. Great video as usual.
Or even a 1400.
It is exactly what I did:
I bought an oem 4100 for a very good price and I am happy with the result. It is not a big leap for many but going from a 1200 to this one is, in my opinion
Yea ever since they released the 1600af at 85, they can never really match the value they've had, especially with the current market. Makes this look bad. I bought a used 3600x for 110 local. I'd go that route
The 1600 af was awesome, had one myself for a while
Exactly why not just go with a previous generation cpu that does better on everything? No need imo to use current generation if the spec is mediocre in comparison
@@RandomGaminginHD Still using one to this day in my VR PC with a 1080ti. Picked it up for around 130 USD here which was easily 1/4 the cost of the next best CPU at the time, the 3600.
@@Madchris8828 only problem is, prices have gone up on older Ryzen, especially 1st and 2nd gen. that didn't used to be the case with AMD, but that shows you how good they hold there value now. for the longest time Intel dominated the market, until AMD finally put out a product that challenged them. but i don't see this being a bad chip, it's just that the 4100 is basically a refresh 3100. so it's probably a hold over CPU until they come out with a new version. im still on 2nd gen Ryzen and i don't see a need to upgrade, though i will say thanks to AMD, Intel has been putting out some pretty impressive stuff since 2021. i had a Intel build, the i5 3570, an older chip these days, but man that thing lasted me a long time, until i bought the Ryzen. i had a gtx 770 for awhile, then i upgraded to 1660 and im looking at maybe getting a new card.
The 4100 is simply AMD making use of APUs that have failed GPUs as a 4c/8t CPU. That's why there's only PCIe 3 support. It's a somewhat smart move for AMD from the perspective of being able to sell a low cost product from chips that would otherwise end up as e-waste. From a consumer POV it is a disappointment even more so when you compare it to the i3 12100F. AMD is still more mfg. capacity limited than Intel, so long as that exists AMD is going to focus on selling higher end or higher margin silicon whenever they can so long as the Zen architecture remains competitive.
That has been a tried and tested process with AMD for decades. Their single-core Sempron 145 CPUs were actually dual-core Athlon X II CPUs with a defective core, rebadged in order to avoid wasting an otherwise usable component. Some motherboards had the ability to unlock the defective core, thus granting a free upgrade in lieu of potential processor lifetime; I have had several MoBos and Sempron 145s and always try doing this, when building rigs out of them: sometimes it works, sometimes it's quite unstable, so I have had to revert it to single-core operation.
This is similar to the old A-series APU's. Those were cheap and not that very good. I still have an A8 5500
The same thing was done throughout the Phenom and Phenom II lines, too
I wish more people understood this.
Binning is nothing new.
You can't even compare this to the 10100F anyways. That cpu has gone as low as 70 bucks, and b460 boards have been as cheap as 70 bucks as well. This cpu is 4 years too late and shows how arrogant AMD is for thinking putting these "budget" cpus on the market at these prices.
Yeah seriously, what is AMD doing? Intel catched up so they need to be competivite again
@Alien Wanderer tf a 30£ a320 board? That's the same price as a ram module.
Why AMD the most "pro consumer" company did this bullshit? Its simple, AMD is just typical cash grab company where they try so hard to maximize their profit from selling garbage products because Lisa aka AMD ceo know their stupid fanboy will still buy those cashgrab garbage products even though there are much better alternative like what Intel has like i3-12100F. Its sad to see people keep overhyping AMD but those stupid people is nothing more than blinded sheep who buy products because of the brand.
i still don't understand why amd do not create a ryzen 3 - 5300X, it could be one awesome cheap CPU
Because it wouldn't do what they want for them. The products they have right now kill 2 birds with one stone: they fill the price range and recycle failed APUs into sellable products. A hypothetical 5300x doesn't fit anywhere as it would have to be priced somewhere around where the 4500 currently is while being decently better performing.
Not ideal for the design, I think. They'd be wasting resource if they pull something like that.
Not great from AMD's messy production point of view. It requires chiplets with half their cores being defective, which is a no - go for AMD.
See how the 3100 and 3300X were impossible to find once they sold out? That's because all defective DIEs were sold, so only a few to be collected afterwards.
Given the current constraints AMD is facing with TSMC 7 nm, they just can't release a massively succesful low end CPU without dragging the whole lineup into shortages . Let's hope the 5 nm production lines are better prepared so we get a R3 7300(X) and athlon 7x00, with possible APU variants.
^I not i
Why AMD the most "pro consumer" company did this bullshit? Its simple, AMD is just typical cash grab company where they try so hard to maximize their profit from selling garbage products because Lisa aka AMD ceo know their stupid fanboy will still buy those cashgrab garbage products even though there are much better alternative like what Intel has like i3-12100F. Its sad to see people keep overhyping AMD but those stupid people is nothing more than blinded sheep who buy products because of the brand.
Intel is the way to got at the moment on lower end cpus in my opinion.
1:55 No bugs here, everything is fine. :D
yeah this chip should have been pcie 4.0 so you could pair it with 6500xt that's why I picked up the i3 12100f for £90 I'm happy with that for now!
Just as intended 🤣
Hope they won't skip raptor lake's I3.I'm really looking forward to it.
Ha ha that is a bug!
AMD has limited silicon wafers and those are naturally going to their high-margin products like server hardware, HEDT and GPUs, so right now the only way they can offer something for consumers is by recycling discarded dies (APU's with defective iGPU's).
Intel is desperate to not let the foundries and tooling they invested billions on sit idle (Losing resale value is literally burning money), and to take back marketshare from AMD, so they can go for lower margins and try to regain consumer trust.
So yeah if you need budget hardware right now Intel is the way to go.
I think you pretty much made up all that crap. Care to back that up with some facts, numbers and sources?
@@vollhorst140 AMD does have limited wafers, commonly reuses chiplets (die) of lower speced parts. Intel is literally wasting money letting brand new fabs idle, they might as well produce something with that tooling they spent billions on.
@@donovan6320 sources? I haven’t heard of intel fabs being idle. You know someone needs to serve dell and hp millions of low price CPU’s for millions of office PCs.
@@vollhorst140 no, what he's saying is that they need to produce as many chips as they can Feasibly. He's not saying they're fabs are idle. He's saying they need to be at peak production because anything that isn't at peak is costing them loads of money. Loads of it, so ANY excuse to use the fabs for ANY product that can bring in money is money well spent, even if profit margins are low.
Not if you are already invested in AMD, though. I briefly considered building a 12400F until I realized a 5600X was an equivalent, drop in upgrade for $220 with tax. It was the only thing I had to buy. And then, there was no way I was going to buy an expensive motherboard I have to live with for the next 3-5 years to justify the purchase with DDR4 so I would have had to go with DDR5 even though it doesn't yet exceed the performance of DDR4. In the near future it will. So I would be buying DDR5 now and again in a couple of years when I can get better bandwidth from it, as well as upgrading to a 12th gen i7 or i9. It all adds up when I can just drop in a CPU upgrade and wait a couple of years to see how this very unstable market works out. If you have an older Ryzen on a B450 MB, going with intel right now would be a complete waste of money.
"Budget AMD CPU" that can't be paired with their "Budget" 6500XT GPU (PCIE 4.0)... Big Brain AMD.
I also got 'scammed' into thinking 4000 series is better than 3000 series, i'm planning to upgrade my 4100 to 3100 so i can utilize my pcie4 on rx 6400
As a happy user of a Ryzen 3 3100 (bought it new with B550 mobo , 16GB(2x8) 3200mhz memory , new case , some extra fans and new 750W PSU for ~330£ two years ago) I had a good laugh when I read the specs of the 4100 for the first time.
Intel 12100f is the king in budget space.
Yeah, it's such a great little cpu
Yeah it’s such a strong 4C, very impressive actually
@@anthonytech In many games it's even faster than the six-core i5 10400f!
@@titantyped69 Yeah really haha!
@@titantyped69 yeah that's funny but show's that intel is learning from their mistake and trying to grab the market again.
rx 6400 has 1050 ti level performance which is 6 years old, and it's sold for more than the 1050 ti was, MSRP implied. This shit is criminal
this kind of crap is why i'm still on an rx580 lol I'm never going to upgrade until gpu makers stop gouging the @#$% out of everyone.
@@shanepotter4635 probably never.
It's kinda like that but deal with it in 2022 as we have many problems like Silicon Shortage and inflation.
The only way the 4100 even deserves a chance compared to the 12100(f) is if for some reason someone was really adamant about not using Intel. I can literally find the 12100f for less than $10 over the 4100 on Newegg right now. Add on that their are LGA 1700 motherboards with under 80-90 that support ddr4 and the total difference is probably not more than $30 between the two. I get that prices will vary depending on location, but those who live where I do, which is the US. Not to mention the better upgrade path in the foreseeable future with Raptor lake likely being compatible with the mobo while AM4 is currently seeing their last releases.
$80 for a mobo?? fuck, intel's hitting the crack pipe too often.
@@Darkest_matter Yep, That's why buying i3 10100f is smart, 10th gen motherboards are not as expensive as the 12th gen.
I'm pretty sure that same person could get a 4600G and not have to spend as much up front if they can get by with the IGP for a while.
Just ended up buying this chip as it was on sale for $69 at Amazon and Newegg. Don't need it to be crazy good, just have a spare 980 and a spare new am4 board , bought this chip, a cheap case, and 16gb ddr4 for around $160 total. So I'm not complaining
Also for others suggesting I shouldn't have (sorry used to constant arguing on the internet)
This will not be my main pc, this is my fourth.
Main: i9-9900k + Rtx 3060 ti
Wife's pc: i7-4770k @4.5ghz+980 ti
Living room pc: asrock deskmini x300 ryzen 5 5600g 16gb 3200mhz ddr4
This pc will be
Bedroom TV pc: Ryzen 3 4100 +gtx980 16gb 2133 ddr4
Damn, now that's a crazy good comment!
I ran into this CPU when browsing online and boy am I surprised, I'm happy with my 3300x for almost the same price in my place. lol hahaha.
Ryzen 3 3300X costs about 110 pounds while the 4100 costs about 100 pounds.
The point you make near the end about upgrading from an older Ryzen is sooo good. It's better to spend the same amount of money for a used 2600 or anything used to upgrade your AM4 system than the 4100. In fact,I have a friend who owns a R3 1200 system and he considers upgrading within the next few months. My advice would either be a 3600 or 2700 for around 100€ or if he he wants to spend less, a 1600af/2600 of 3100 for around 60-80€ .
IF the 4100 goes down to around 50-60€ perhaps I would recommend it. It doesn't worth more than that. To be honest if it was name 4300G or 4100G and it had integrated graphics a cost of around 80-90€ could be considered somewhat reasonable.
4300G is already an existing chip, im currently using one lol
@@BanControl I am talking about what would make sense for this chip to be. You totally missed my point.
" lol"
3600 imo would be the best if your friend got it for the right price
I'd love a comparison between the 3100 and this 4100 🙏🏻
Ok next you have to do a performance comparison of the AMD Ryzen 4100 vs the AMD FX-4100! Please! :)
This R3 4100 performs worse than my R3 3300X. Just due to the fact that its based on an APU rather than it just being a CPU. Also, 1:55 What the hell happened there!?
Just Cyberpunk being Cyberpunk
I'm in 2077 and I can confirm 1:55 happens every week and that's how accurate Cyberpunk 2077 really is.
I love how at 1:55 the car starts flying and he starts talking as if nothing happened lol
I understand GPU performance by itself, but it's hard for me to understand CPU performance unless it's compared to other familiar CPUs. This is because I don't play any games that are commonly benchmarked
what games do you play?
Hot take, cpu doesn't really matter for games as long as it's 4c/8t and you have the gpu power to stick to 1440p. I commonly build 4790 and 3770 refurb systems with 3060ti+ gpus to keep customer cost as little as possible and there's really no difference to a 12400 or 5600x as long as the game stays gpu bound. The exceptions are very obvious ones, like map games, and the type of people invested in those usually want 5800x+ tier cpu power for other things anyways.
@@joemarais7683 I heavily disagree, because the AMD FX-9590 is an 8 core 8 thread CPU, but it is severely underpowered compared to my Ryzen 5 3500 with 6 cores and 6 threads. Also the 9590 has outdated instructions
@@beavatatlan Well the most demanding games that I play are Planet Coaster, The Sims 4, BeamNG Drive, Sonic Generations and Just Cause 4. Most other games I play are either Valve games or other random stuff
Thanks for the great benchmarks! I disagree with the notion that this class of CPU is not good to pair with a 2080 Super class GPU. If someone is looking for 4k 60fps at the best price available, a similar pairing may be a good option if the price is right.
1:54 bro what was that 😂
Accidents💀
I'll keep my 6-core Ryzen 5 1600AF then. Thanks for the info. :-)
Only 64$ now. Crazy that because of the cheap 85$ Rx 580s on Newegg it’s possible to make a 400$ new pc with a dedicated Gpu
Yeah...even in poor markets like where I live it's tricky to get these CPUs while modern i3 chips are everywhere...
Surprisingly the 12100F is not even the bottleneck for the 2080 Super, but the 4100 is despite having the same number of Cores and threads.
I recently upgraded from my fx9590 and wanted to stick to and and get onto AM4 for as cheap as possible while actually upgrading my system and so far I am quite happy with the cpu and the whole platform everything feels so much smoother and sure it doesn’t give me a lot more fps in games but there’s a nice improvement also I won’t be paying as much for electricity
RGHD: this cpu is 99$
My country: 250$ take it or leave it
That's bonkers. The good price for this CPU would be around $50.
Great video, you should make a video about the Ryzen 5 5600! Keep it up :)
“This chip isn’t progress…”
RIP Ryzen 3 4100, hopefully you be on sale quite soon then
Im more interested in Ryzen 5 4500 with no intergrated graphics, is it worth to buy?
"My own 85 poinds has gone towards this video"
Dont worry random, the two adverts at the start had no skip button.
in this case you re presenting, the 4100 paired with the 2080super, which less likely for someone to pair, would be best to be tested at 1440p res, would take the load off de cpu a bit more
Nice video! Thanks for your awesome work.
I wonder how many 1200/1400/2200g/2400g + 570/580/1060 based rigs are still kicking around that could use this as an upgrade, but a used 3600 would be a better investment for a little extra cash.
finally commenting after buying a new rig after having potato for a long period watching your vidoes
How does it compare to the R3 3100 which runs PCIe 4?
From Denmark.
Hi there, nice site you have and you come up with many funny things with older cases, that's good.
You tested the Ryzen 3 4100 and of course it's not a super processor.
But here in Denmark, where we have the world's highest taxation and 25% VAT for the state on all goods, it now costs only 509 kroner, which is equal to 73 dollars og equal to 60 pund.
And in terms of price performance, I think it is a really good processor, although it is a 4/8 where the ryzen 1200 was a 4/4, so it is far more powerful than a Ryzen 1200.
It's sad how quickly AMD is trying to essentially destroy the sense of goodwill they had built up over the last 5 years since Ryzen launched. The 4000 series budget CPUs and lower end RX 6000 GPUs are another league of disappointing. At least I see a lot of 6600s for dirt cheap on eBay now compared to the MSRP, that has me tempted, but nothing else that they've put out in the last year or so has been particularly exciting aside from maybe the 5800X3D.
The GPU side of things is the most strange to me. For the 6500 XT (and probably the 6400 too) they slapped a laptop GPU onto a desktop board, which came with the side effect of having a paltry amount of PCIE bandwidth and a pathetic 64bit memory bus. Performing the same or worse than much older GPUs (6400 vs 1050ti and 6500 XT vs RX 580/5500 XT) for the same or higher prices is impossible to find excuses for. This is only if your system has sufficient PCIE version support too, otherwise you lose performance and essentially waste some of the GPU's actual potential. Continuing on with that, I'm fairly sure those low end APU based 4000/5000 CPUs also only support PCIE 3.0, essentially cutting away performance from AMD's own 6400 and 6500 XT. It's all just baffling to me.
me with i3 12100f & rx 6500xt is good right now. just a little problem that i still using 1 stick of ram and dont know what low budget game capture card to buy... 🤷🏽♂️
I'm pretty happy with it. My old 4690k gave up the ghost, and had to get something ASAP on a broke budget. i3 is the clear winner, but sadly it's more expensive here in Finland.
I've never built a PC before. I have a tight budget of 200usd. for everything. Case, GPU< CPU, MOtherboard. I think it will be slightly more than 200 but a CPU like this in my eyes is a dream.. Its always disheartenning when experienced pc builders who can buy and trade parts easily, bash the components you're looking at. I am only going to play Genshin impact so 4.0 ghz with a gtx 1650 seems like heaven
Got the 4100 for 50€ brand new to replace my Athlon 3000G. It was a good deal. 👍
1:55 YEEET!!
Barely above 60fps in an old game like GTA V sometimes - that's quite sad. Although it's not a bad CPU per se, the price is ridiculous, too. This kind of performance should come from a 50$ part by now.
Yeah, 4100 will only make sense if you can get it for a good price, it is not bad, though a bit of stepback or sidegrade to what it was supposed to replaced. I got one for my second build, sff, it is a good little cpu. got one for $70 on a clearance sale from where I am,
My friend getting it for
60 pounds
just get the 4600G instead of the 4500. It's basically the 4500 with the iGPU so you can get two birds with one stone!
it would be nice to compare 10100f to 12100f
to see if the price difference is worth it
they already did a good 4 cores cpu, 3300x they removed it because was so powerfull that performed same or better than 3600
From price point alone it's such a pointless CPU considering the 10th gen parts are cheaper, even the motherboards are cheaper on socket 1200. You could get an i5 system with a 10400f and b560 board giving the same ram overclocking ability and more performance for less money overall. AMD are continuing to dissapoint me, ever since the launch of 5000 series they have been money grabbing and offering very little in the market section that made them successful
for 50 bucks, which is the price of it rn, its way better than the athlon and celeron crap at the same price. I recommend it
Such a small boy but you gotta love him
😳😳😳
I'm building a pc with this cpu here shortly. I'll be pairing it with a 6600. It's being build to upgrade whenever I desire. All for fun.
I bought a 4100 a few months back as a quick stop gap after the old 1600x in my living room PC went pop, it's mainly used as a Genshin Impact box for my daughter and as a Kodi/media player. I seriously have no complaints, it does everything I need it to do and for the £59.99 I paid for it on Amazon it's been a bargain, it's currently paired with 16gb 3200 DDR4 and an RX580 which is showing it's age with newer games but it'll play Ratchet & Clank, RDR 2 and others at 60 if you don't mind playing with the settings.. I really need to upgrade that GPU..
I'm not sure what the price is in the UK but the 4100 is on sale for slightly under $70 in the US. This finally made me pull the trigger on one of these and I was able to make a sub $330 PC. (not including a case, because I had one lying around, or graphics card)
Difference is this will fit in a 40-50 buck ddr4 board and will take a 65w 5700x if required as an upgrade path . That in mind the Intel isint 20 bucks more it's 150-200 more overall
comparisons should actually be between previous gen AM4 and a 4100 as people will be looking at upgrade options.
I dont see value of comparing to intel only as that is a new build scenario, and is mostly academic.
People who care about 4100 definitely will want to use existing motherboards and likely trying to estimate their upgrade path and are running athlon 3100 or 3200G or less
1:55 OHHH NOOO THE GAME IS DESTABILIZING!! SOMEONE CALL HELP, THE 1.52 PATCH DIDN'T HELP!!!😭
The best option with this chip is getting it in a motherboard/ram kit to get you started. Maybe you budgeted all the money towards a nicer GPU, this is a solid starter build. Buy a decent case and PSU and a cheap SSD and you're ready to go. You can eventually upgrade to a R7 or R9 later on. You could also get a decent RX 6600 or GT, or 6650 or a RTX 3060 TI to pair nicely with this. You spent the budget on a GPU so you just need to be able to play with it. I spent 3 months saving up to build the rest of the PC watching my new GPU sitting in a box being a literal paper weight.
I have this CPU paired with RX 580 Nitro 8GB and 16gb RAM and play all games on ultra settings on 1080P.
It is good cpu.
I was going to look at 7'ing my Ryzen 5 but talking with a chap who crunches numbers and stuff he said in reality I would see very little material gain from apps and games and that my current setup is good for some years to come. So the only thing now is to sort out a new PSU as this one is getting old and I do want to get a Thermaltake laminated glass case that I can mount on the wall and make look funky fresh so there might be a Coolermaster HAF XM up on ebay sometime soon ;)
Everyone: "AMD, can we have 5300g?"
AMD: "We have 5300g at home"
*the 5300g at home*
1:55 Cyberbug 2077 special.
They also were supposed to release the retail 4600G for 154 usd but it's nowhere to be found yet.
I'm really eager to see if the 4500 is a decent jump from the popular 3500/3500x. The 4100 on the other hand.... the less said the better :/
Yeah I’m quite looking forward to testing the 4500
Purposely gimped to keep people in the higher price segments.
You can get used office PC's with the I5 6500, and 8gb ram for under $200 now. Going that route still seems better than buying new I3 or R3 products.
Or just buy a console
Holy shit, that difference is pretty massive! 😬
If you want this kind performance with a cheap mainboard perhaps the 10105F is an option also? Try finding a sale of a socket 1200 mainboard for that somewhere. BTW AM4 and socket 1200 wont get the most out an pci-e 4.0 optimized gpu like the 6400XT or the 6500XT. That may be a good consideration to go for the still expensive socket 1700 mainboard and a i3 12100F
This is what happens when Evil Su took over AMD and went full Intel/Nvidia but costing much worst.
I wanted buy one of these today but my b550m board I've just bought wont have the latest update which im unable to do. Settled on a R3 3100 instead.
This is $65.00 USD now.
Just found one used for $25 😅
This video has a whole new context when you realize it's the EXACT same spec as the steam deck's shitty 4c/8t 4MB cache 3.5GHz cpu. This configuration performs shockingly well given the mildly higher clocks. Maybe it has something to do with the memory configuration.
AMD motherboards are still cheaper than Intel MBs, so you could get one of these, pair it with second hand 1050 ti or 1650, and still play modern AAA games at 1080p low. As for 6400, well, perhaps. Performance is worse than on PCIe 4.0 but is not so bad if you only use 1080p low or med.
amd mobos is still not way cheaper than intel 10th gen and 11th gen mobos, as they are basically evened out in price, while pcie 4.0 will make this 4100 vomits in blood
I think this is a big f*ck you to the AM4 socket. The cynical me thinks this might be a "failed" 3300X. Way to go AMD.
You know it's bad when even RGinHD calls your CPU 'meh'.
You know a chip is bad when even RGinHD doesn't like it.
I can't imagine AMD is going to sell very many of these. It would be fine for an office PC, except it doesn't have an IGP. And IGP's are critical for making office PCs as cheap as possible. I know that AMD is planning on putting an IGP in most of their CPUs like Intel does, so once they do that, that is where they should use all their lowest binned chiplets. I didn't know about the change in cache amounts so that was surprising to hear. But for office PCs that doesn't really matter. IMHO dual core CPUs need to be killed off NOW; even an office PC does enough to utilize a quad core these days; it just doesn't have to be a monster of a quad core to do it. ;-)
Just finished building and running my gaming PC thru standard benchmark programs, and I am actually wondering how come my Cinebench score for the Ryzen 3 4100 seemed far better than the one you posted here?
My Cinebench R23 score posted the following for my Ryzen 3 4100:
- Multi Core: 5786
- Single Core: 1101
Your Cinebench R20 results:
- Multi Core: 2272
- Single Core: 446
This video made it seem that the Ryzen 3 4100 is running far more worse than how I saw in person. I dunno how you got those scores tho, but my PC rig certainly isn’t posting the same horrible Cinebench results.
I wouldn't be a bad value product if it is priced at $70 or lower. Also, it shouldn't be called Ryzen. This level of performance for nowadays only deserves the name of Athlon, not Ryzen.
I think the only viable use for the R3 4100 is for a lower end custom PC that isn't intended for any serious gaming. Maybe just general uses like browsing, light video editing (if paired with some kind of decent/cheap gpu) and it's a readily available, in socket-upgrade for someone using a R3 1200 or R5 1400--though I'd personally go for a used R5 2600 or 1600AF seeing as there's way more multi-core performance and similar single core for around the same price. Those types of scenarios *do* exist, and it makes sense for AMD to repurpose parts that would've otherwise gone to the landfill. Though from an enthusiast perspective, it definitely feels like regression in terms of performance per dollar compared to previous gen & the competition. AM5/Zen4 will hopefully offer more compelling R3 SKUs...maybe.
I’m annoyingly stuck with a 775 system due to the current way things are… these CPU and board prices need to drop.
do you think its a good upgrade from a ryzen 3 2200g? paired with a rx570 4gb
I would say save more money and get the 5600.
@Katinggangseng only if you want to keep the majoriy of the hardware, if your going big and new you might as well throw down, but i agree with your statement
unless your going for 144+ fps consistantly you should just max your platform rather than dump a shitton of money at for minimal improvements in Competitive esport titles
PCIE 3 is fine for a chip like this, you're not gonna lose any performance from the cards that are going to reasonably be paired with this as the CPU will be the bottleneck, not the PCIE. It's a nice little budget CPU for those that only have £85 to spend.
not for people who buy 6500xt on a budget
@Antares 8001 would like to see actual real world limitations people speak of, because if your buying a 4100/6500xt new, im pretty sure your aiming for more than 60 fps and these products are quickly removed from your look into hardware.
Bro its my cpu!!! Its awesome for playing battlefield 5 at ultra
But sure is overpriced for it's price.
I recently got one on sale for just $60 in my country, and quite honestly, the difference in price between this CPU and the Intel 12100F is significant enough that I can literally buy a Corsair 550W PSU or get a 16GB DDR4 RAM set. Add the fact that most mobos with decent heatsinks for gaming that will work for the Intel 12100F is also significantly more expensive than a decent B450M mobo for this CPU. So for me, going for this CPU instead of the more "better" Intel 12100F seemed a much sensible choice considering I'm on a tight budget.
last year 4100 was better priced than 4500 but kinda odd in southeast asia right now 4500 dropped prices lately I got R5 4500 and Msi B450 combo brand new just for $100 during a flash sale while R3 4100 is still remains it original price
I guess the only plus point of this is on a very tight budget as it can be paired with a cheap A320/B450 with appropriate bios for £30-£40 and still give an upgrade path to more powerful CPU's. 12100 is a great budget CPU for £100, but even an H610 board is £75. I'd personally pay the £50-60 price difference for the Intel platform, especially when you consider overall system cost which is probably only 10% price difference for 30% more performance potential with more powerful GPUs
Even the most demanding games reached more than 60 fps average, so I don't understand people's complaining. Not so long long ago for this price you could get CPUs adequate for GTA SA... Today's low budget, but not fully entry level chips are actually more than decent.
Well I'd most definitely watch a video where this CPU is paired with a 1660 or a 3050 GPU.
I feel like upgrading to this 4100 from athlon 200ge at the same time i dont like too
dont. the 4500 is cheaper for some reason at 80 bucks while the 4100 goes for 115.
Can you do comparison old used ryzen 5 versus newest ryzen 3?? It s will be great
It would be interesting to compare it to a 1600/1600AF or 2600, as those chips should be even cheaper than it on the 2nd hand market and should perform a lot better. They just seem to be selling off excess stock from their APU's, with the graphics disabled. Those used to be cheap bargain parts like the Athlon X4 740, and now they try and fob them off as "normal" low end chips.
Any chance of a 2022 recap of the Bristol ridge AM4 A series APUs?
12100F is a budget beast. Never thought i3 could perform so well.