Key Differences
In short — Core i9-13900F outperforms the cheaper Core i3-4160 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Core i3-4160 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i9-13900F is 3089 days newer than the cheaper Core i3-4160.
Advantages of Intel Core i3-4160
- Up to 93% cheaper than Core i9-13900F - CA$36.99 vs CA$564.18
- Up to 92% better value when playing Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Core i9-13900F - CA$0.21 vs CA$2.61 per FPS
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i9-13900F doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Core i9-13900F
- Performs up to 20% better in Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Core i3-4160 - 216 vs 180 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i3-4160 - 32 vs 4 threads
Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Jul 21st, 2014
FPS
180
83.33333333333334%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$0.21/FPS
100%
Price, CA$
CA$36.99
100%
Value Winner
Buy for CA$36.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 8 minutes ago
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2023
FPS
216
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$2.61/FPS
8.045977011494253%
Price, CA$
CA$564.18
6%
FPS Winner
Buy for CA$564.18 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 6 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Jul 21st, 2014
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2023
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • Jul 21st, 2014
Single-Core
1064
38.97435897435898%
Multi-Core
2072
12.033219118415705%
Intel Core i3-4160 | vs | Intel Core i9-13900F |
---|---|---|
Jul 21st, 2014 | Release Date | Jan 4th, 2023 |
Core i3 | Collection | Core i9 |
Haswell | Codename | Raptor Lake |
Intel Socket 1150 | Socket | Intel Socket 1700 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 24 |
4 | Threads | 32 |
3.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.0 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.6 GHz |
54 W | TDP | Not Available |
22 nm | Process Size | 10 nm |
36.0x | Multiplier | 20.0x |
Intel HD 4400 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |