Key Differences
In short — Core i5-14400F outperforms the cheaper FX-8150 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-8150 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i5-14400F is 4471 days newer than the cheaper FX-8150.
Advantages of AMD FX-8150
- Up to 73% cheaper than Core i5-14400F - CA$87.12 vs CA$324.93
- Up to 68% better value when playing Elden Ring than Core i5-14400F - CA$0.79 vs CA$2.46 per FPS
Advantages of Intel Core i5-14400F
- Performs up to 20% better in Elden Ring than FX-8150 - 132 vs 110 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-8150 - 16 vs 8 threads
Elden Ring
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Maximum
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
FPS
110
83%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$0.79/FPS
100%
Price, CA$
CA$87.12
100%
Value Winner
Buy for CA$87.12 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 130 minutes ago
Desktop • Jan 8th, 2024
FPS
132
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$2.46/FPS
32%
Price, CA$
CA$324.93
26%
FPS Winner
Buy for CA$324.93 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 130 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Maximum
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
Desktop • Jan 8th, 2024
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8150 | vs | Intel Core i5-14400F |
---|---|---|
Oct 12th, 2011 | Release Date | Jan 8th, 2024 |
FX | Collection | Core i5 |
Zambezi | Codename | Raptor Lake |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1700 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 10 |
8 | Threads | 16 |
3.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.5 GHz |
3.9 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.7 GHz |
125 W | TDP | Not Available |
32 nm | Process Size | 10 nm |
18.0x | Multiplier | 25.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |