Intel Core i3-12100F vs Intel Core i7-10750H Comparison

The Intel Core i3-12100F and Intel Core i7-10750H represent two very different design philosophies from Intel. The i3-12100F is a modern desktop part built on the 10 nm Alder Lake architecture, while the i7-10750H is a 14 nm mobile processor from the Comet Lake-H generation. Benchmark data shows a decisive overall victory for the i3-12100F, which wins 21 of the 25 head-to-head tests. The i7-10750H claims only 4 wins, but those come in specific workloads that favor its higher core count and unique memory bandwidth characteristics. The average benchmark score for the i3-12100F is 13494, while the i7-10750H sits at 13024, a difference that places both CPUs in the 68th percentile of all processors in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-threaded performance?

A: The Intel Core i3-12100F dominates in single-threaded workloads. It scores 893 in 3dmark_single_thread, 1674 in cinebench_r23_singlecore, and 1932 in geekbench_singlecore, while the i7-10750H scores 728, 1372, and 1417 respectively. The single-thread advantage ranges from 22% to 36.3% across these tests.

Q: Does the i7-10750H ever outperform the i3-12100F?

A: Yes, the i7-10750H wins in 4 tests: 3dmark_16_threads (4162 vs 4051), 3dmark_max_threads (4186 vs 4023), passmark_data_compression (167213 vs 160452), and passmark_random_string_sorting (21416 vs 15809). The random string sorting win is particularly large at 26.2%.

Q: How do the two CPUs compare in multi-threaded rendering?

A: The i3-12100F leads in every Cinebench multi-core test. It scores 1195 in cinebench_r15_multicore, 4981 in cinebench_r20_multicore, and 11860 in cinebench_r23_multicore, compared to 979, 4081, and 9718 for the i7-10750H. The advantage is consistently around 22%.

Q: What is the difference in encryption performance?

A: The i3-12100F shows a massive 105.4% advantage in passmark_data_encryption, scoring 8071 versus 3930 for the i7-10750H. This is the largest single-test delta between the two processors.

Q: Which CPU has a higher base clock speed?

A: The i3-12100F has a base clock of 3.30 GHz, while the i7-10750H has a base clock of 2.60 GHz. However, the i7-10750H has a higher boost clock at 5.00 GHz compared to 4.30 GHz for the i3-12100F.

Q: How do their cache configurations compare?

A: Both processors share 12 MB of L3 cache, but they differ at the lower levels. The i3-12100F has 80 KB of L1 and 1.25 MB of L2 per core, while the i7-10750H has 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two CPUs is substantial. The i3-12100F uses the Alder Lake-S architecture on a 10 nm process node, while the i7-10750H relies on the older Comet Lake-H architecture built on 14 nm. This process difference directly contributes to the i3-12100F's superior efficiency and clock-for-clock performance.

Core configurations also differ significantly. The i3-12100F packs 4 cores and 8 threads, while the i7-10750H offers 6 cores and 12 threads. Despite having fewer physical cores, the i3-12100F's newer architecture allows it to win most multi-threaded benchmarks. The i7-10750H's extra cores only help in specific scenarios that scale well beyond 8 threads.

Memory support separates the two as well. The i3-12100F supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the i7-10750H is limited to DDR4. The i7-10750H does have a recorded memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s, a figure not provided for the i3-12100F in the database. Both use dual-channel memory buses.

Platform compatibility is another major divider. The i3-12100F uses Intel Socket 1700 and supports PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The i7-10750H uses Intel BGA 1440, a soldered mobile socket, and supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes. The i7-10750H also includes integrated UHD Graphics, while the i3-12100F has no integrated graphics.

Cache hierarchies reveal further differences. The i3-12100F has 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1.25 MB of L2 per core. The i7-10750H has 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core. Both processors share 12 MB of L3 cache, but the per-core L2 advantage of the i3-12100F is notable.

Power characteristics differ as well. The i3-12100F has a TDP of 58 watts, while the i7-10750H has a TDP of 45 watts. The i7-10750H compensates with a 5.00 GHz boost clock versus the i3-12100F's 4.30 GHz, but the newer architecture of the i3-12100F proves more effective in benchmark results.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The i3-12100F establishes dominance early in the 3DMark suite. In 3dmark_single_thread, the i3-12100F scores 893 against 728 for the i7-10750H, a 22.7% advantage. The 3dmark_2_threads test shows a 22.3% lead with 1659 versus 1356. The 3dmark_4_threads result is 2859 versus 2394, a 19.4% gap. The i3-12100F continues with 3dmark_8_threads at 4026 versus 3497, a 15.1% win.

The i7-10750H fights back in the higher-thread 3DMark tests. It wins 3dmark_16_threads with 4162 versus 4051, a modest 2.7% margin. The 3dmark_max_threads result also favors the i7-10750H at 4186 versus 4023, a 3.9% lead. These wins suggest the i7-10750H's 6 cores and 12 threads provide an edge when all resources are fully utilized.

Cinebench results are strongly one-sided. The i3-12100F wins cinebench_r15_multicore with 1195 versus 979, a 22.1% margin. The cinebench_r15_singlecore test shows 168 versus 138, a 21.7% win. Cinebench R20 and R23 follow the same pattern: the i3-12100F leads multicore by 22.1% and 22%, and singlecore by 22% and 22%. The consistency across Cinebench versions reinforces the architectural advantage.

Geekbench reveals the largest single-thread gap. The i3-12100F scores 1932 in geekbench_singlecore, a 36.3% lead over the i7-10750H's 1417. The multicore result is 7252 versus 5574, a 30.1% advantage. These are among the biggest deltas in the entire comparison.

PassMark tests show a mix of results. The i3-12100F wins passmark_single_thread with 3444 versus 2625, a 31.2% margin. It also wins passmark_multithread with 14015 versus 11616, a 20.7% lead. The passmark_physics test shows 985 versus 700, a 40.7% advantage. The passmark_find_prime_numbers test has the i3-12100F at 60 versus 39, a 53.8% win. Passmark_data_encryption is the standout: 8071 versus 3930, a massive 105.4% advantage.

The i7-10750H takes its remaining wins in PassMark. Passmark_data_compression goes to the i7-10750H at 167213 versus 160452, a 4% margin. Passmark_random_string_sorting is the i7-10750H's best result at 21416 versus 15809, a 26.2% win. These two victories highlight the i7-10750H's capability in memory-heavy data manipulation tasks.

The Verdict

The database clearly favors the Intel Core i3-12100F for most users. It wins 21 of 25 head-to-head tests and holds substantial leads in single-threaded performance, rendering workloads, and encryption. The i3-12100F's 36.3% lead in geekbench_singlecore and 105.4% lead in passmark_data_encryption are decisive. Its average benchmark score of 13494 also exceeds the i7-10750H's 13024.

The i7-10750H is the better choice only for specific workloads. Its wins in 3dmark_16_threads, 3dmark_max_threads, passmark_data_compression, and passmark_random_string_sorting indicate strengths in fully threaded scenarios and data compression tasks. The 26.2% win in random string sorting is particularly notable. However, these 4 wins come against 21 for the i3-12100F, making the overall recommendation straightforward.

Users who need maximum single-thread speed, modern platform features, or strong encryption performance should select the i3-12100F. Users who prioritize data compression throughput or random string sorting workloads may find the i7-10750H more suitable. The i7-10750H also offers integrated UHD Graphics, which the i3-12100F lacks entirely.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification category. The i3-12100F uses the Alder Lake architecture on a 10 nm node, while the i7-10750H uses Comet Lake on 14 nm. The i3-12100F has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the i7-10750H has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Clock speeds differ in both directions. The i3-12100F has a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The i7-10750H has a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. TDP also varies: 58 watts for the i3-12100F and 45 watts for the i7-10750H.

Socket and platform support are completely different. The i3-12100F uses Intel Socket 1700, while the i7-10750H uses Intel BGA 1440. The i3-12100F supports PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the i7-10750H supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes. Memory support includes DDR4 and DDR5 for the i3-12100F, but only DDR4 for the i7-10750H.

Cache configurations differ at L1 and L2 levels. The i3-12100F has 80 KB of L1 and 1.25 MB of L2 per core. The i7-10750H has 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core. Both share 12 MB of L3 cache.

The i7-10750H includes integrated UHD Graphics, while the i3-12100F has no integrated graphics. The i3-12100F has a launch MSRP of $97, while the i7-10750H has no recorded launch MSRP. The i3-12100F has a die size of 163 mm², while the i7-10750H has no recorded die size. The i7-10750H has a recorded memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s, while the i3-12100F does not have a recorded value.

Where Each One Wins

The i3-12100F wins across the broadest range of workloads. Single-threaded tasks are its strongest area, with leads between 21.7% and 36.3% across all single-core tests. Rendering workloads in Cinebench also favor the i3-12100F consistently at around 22%. Encryption performance is exceptional, with a 105.4% advantage. Physics calculations show a 40.7% lead, and floating point math shows a 27.6% advantage.

The i3-12100F also wins in integer math with a 3.1% margin and extended instructions with a 3.6% margin. Prime number finding shows a 53.8% lead. The passmark_single_thread and passmark_multithread results both favor the i3-12100F by 31.2% and 20.7% respectively. The 3dmark_2_threads, 4_threads, and 8_threads tests all go to the i3-12100F with margins between 15.1% and 22.3%.

The i7-10750H wins in a narrow set of scenarios. Its 6-core, 12-thread configuration gives it an edge in 3dmark_16_threads and 3dmark_max_threads, though the margins are small at 2.7% and 3.9%. Data compression is a clear strength with a 4% win. Random string sorting is the standout victory at 26.2%, making this the only test where the i7-10750H achieves a double-digit margin.

For users running heavily threaded workloads that fully utilize more than 8 threads, the i7-10750H may hold a slight advantage. For data compression and string sorting tasks, the i7-10750H is the better performer. For everything else, the i3-12100F delivers superior results with its modern architecture and higher per-core performance.