Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — Core i9-9900K outperforms the more expensive Core i3-10105F on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck! The better performing Core i9-9900K is 879 days older than the more expensive Core i3-10105F.
Advantages of Core i9-9900K
- Performs up to 4% better in Star Wars Jedi: Survivor than Core i3-10105F - 133 vs 128 FPS
- Up to 69% cheaper than Core i3-10105F - €22.54 vs €72.17
- Up to 70% better value when playing Star Wars Jedi: Survivor than Core i3-10105F - €0.17 vs €0.56 per FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i3-10105F - 16 vs 8 threads
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i3-10105F doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Core i3-10105F
- Consumes up to 32% less energy than Intel Core i9-9900K - 65 vs 95 Watts
Star Wars Jedi: Survivor
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Desktop • Oct 19th, 2018
FPS
133
100%
Value, €/FPS
€0.17/FPS
100%
Price, €
€22.54
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for €22.54 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 406 minutes ago
Buy for €72.17 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 406 minutes ago
My Games
With selected game settings
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Desktop • Oct 19th, 2018
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Core i9-9900K | vs | Core i3-10105F |
---|---|---|
Oct 19th, 2018 | Release Date | Mar 16th, 2021 |
Core i9 | Collection | Core i3 |
Coffee Lake | Codename | Comet Lake |
Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 4 |
16 | Threads | 8 |
3.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.7 GHz |
5.0 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.4 GHz |
95 W | TDP | 65 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
36.0x | Multiplier | 37.0x |
UHD Graphics 630 | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |