Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — Ryzen 9 7900X3D outperforms the cheaper Core i9-10900F on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck! The better performing Ryzen 9 7900X3D is 979 days newer than the cheaper Core i9-10900F.
Advantages of Core i9-10900F
- Up to 0% cheaper than Ryzen 9 7900X3D - $555.82 vs $558.55
- Consumes up to 46% less energy than AMD Ryzen 9 7900X3D - 65 vs 120 Watts
Advantages of Ryzen 9 7900X3D
- Performs up to 30% better in Starfield than Core i9-10900F - 82 vs 63 FPS
- Up to 23% better value when playing Starfield than Core i9-10900F - $6.81 vs $8.82 per FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i9-10900F - 24 vs 20 threads
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i9-10900F doesn't have integrated graphics
Starfield
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Buy for €555.82 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 216 minutes ago
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2023
FPS
82
100%
Value, €/FPS
€6.81/FPS
100%
Price, €
€558.55
99%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for €558.55 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 219 minutes ago
My Games
With selected game settings
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2023
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Core i9-10900F | vs | Ryzen 9 7900X3D |
---|---|---|
Apr 30th, 2020 | Release Date | Jan 4th, 2023 |
Core i9 | Collection | Ryzen 9 |
Comet Lake | Codename | Raphael |
Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | AMD Socket AM5 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
10 | Cores | 12 |
20 | Threads | 24 |
2.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 4.4 GHz |
5.2 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.6 GHz |
65 W | TDP | 120 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 5 nm |
28.0x | Multiplier | 44.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Radeon Graphics |
No | Overclockable | Yes |