Core i7-3687U vs FX-4100

Core i7-3687U vs FX-4100 Performance Spectrum

Core i7-3687U

2 / 4

2,621

0.0%

2,630

+0.3%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Core i7-3687U vs FX-4100 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core i7-3687U vs FX-4100: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core i7-3687U

2013

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 4000, while FX-4100 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,621 vs 2,630).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (4 MB vs 8 MB).
❌438.9% higher power demand at 512W vs 95W.

FX-4100

2011

Why buy it

✅+100% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 4 MB).
✅Draws 95W instead of 512W, a 417W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $115 MSRP, while Core i7-3687U mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-3687U can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is FX-4100 better than Core i7-3687U?

Yes. FX-4100 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.3% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, FX-4100 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.5% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, FX-4100 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 4 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

FX-4100 is the better buy right now. FX-4100 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $115 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (22.9 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core i7-3687U makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i7-3687U vs FX-4100 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core i7-3687U

The Core i7-3687U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 January 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.3 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,621 points. Launch price was $69.

FX-4100

The FX-4100 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 12 October 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Zambezi (2011−2012) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 8192 kB. L2 cache: 4096 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: AM3+. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,630 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-3687U packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the FX-4100 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the FX-4100 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.3 GHz on the Core i7-3687U versus 3.8 GHz on the FX-4100 — a 14.1% clock advantage for the FX-4100 (base: 2.1 GHz vs 3.6 GHz). The Core i7-3687U uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the FX-4100 uses Zambezi (2011−2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-3687U scores 2,621 against the FX-4100's 2,630 — a 0.3% lead for the FX-4100. L3 cache: 4 MB (total) on the Core i7-3687U vs 8192 kB on the FX-4100.

Feature	Core i7-3687U	FX-4100
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	3.3 GHz	3.8 GHz+15%
Base Clock	2.1 GHz	3.6 GHz+71%
L3 Cache	4 MB (total)	8192 kB+100%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	4096 kB+1500%
Process	22 nm-31%	32 nm
Architecture	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)	Zambezi (2011−2012)
PassMark	2,621	2,630
Geekbench 6 Single	640	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	1,240	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-3687U uses the BGA1023 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the FX-4100 uses AM3+ (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i7-3687U	FX-4100
Socket	BGA1023	AM3+
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1600	—
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i7-3687U) / not specified (FX-4100). The Core i7-3687U includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 4000), while the FX-4100 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-3687U targets Enthusiast. Direct competitor: Core i7-3687U rivals Ryzen 7 3700U.