Key Differences
In short — Core i9-10920X outperforms the cheaper Core i5-10400F on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Core i5-10400F is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i9-10920X is 194 days older than the cheaper Core i5-10400F.
Advantages of Intel Core i5-10400F
- Up to 87% cheaper than Core i9-10920X - CA$157.24 vs CA$1170.48
- Up to 86% better value when playing Dying Light 2: Stay Human than Core i9-10920X - CA$1.19 vs CA$8.61 per FPS
- Consumes up to 61% less energy than Intel Core i9-10920X - 65 vs 165 Watts
Advantages of Intel Core i9-10920X
- Performs up to 3% better in Dying Light 2: Stay Human than Core i5-10400F - 136 vs 132 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i5-10400F - 24 vs 12 threads
Dying Light 2: Stay Human
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
132
97%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$1.19/FPS
100%
Price, CA$
CA$157.24
100%
Value Winner
Buy for CA$157.24 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 1945 minutes ago
Desktop • Oct 19th, 2019
FPS
136
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$8.61/FPS
13%
Price, CA$
CA$1170.48
13%
FPS Winner
Buy for CA$1,170.48 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 1945 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Desktop • Oct 19th, 2019
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i5-10400F | vs | Intel Core i9-10920X |
---|---|---|
Apr 30th, 2020 | Release Date | Oct 19th, 2019 |
Core i5 | Collection | Core i9 Extreme |
Comet Lake | Codename | Cascade Lake |
Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | Intel Socket 2066 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 12 |
12 | Threads | 24 |
2.9 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
4.3 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.6 GHz |
65 W | TDP | 165 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
29.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |