Key Differences
In short — Core i3-10320 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 i3-10320 and the cheaper Core i5-10400F have been released at the same time.
Advantages of Intel Core i3-10320
- Performs up to 2% better in Dying Light 2: Stay Human than Core i5-10400F - 134 vs 132 FPS
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i5-10400F doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Core i5-10400F
- Up to 17% cheaper than Core i3-10320 - $73.09 vs $87.75
- Up to 16% better value when playing Dying Light 2: Stay Human than Core i3-10320 - $0.61 vs $0.73 per FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i3-10320 - 12 vs 8 threads
Dying Light 2: Stay Human
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Buy for €97.4 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 100 minutes ago
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
132
98%
Value, €/FPS
€0.61/FPS
100%
Price, €
€81.13
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €81.13 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 101 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i3-10320 | vs | Intel Core i5-10400F |
---|---|---|
Apr 30th, 2020 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
Core i3 | Collection | Core i5 |
Comet Lake | Codename | Comet Lake |
Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 6 |
8 | Threads | 12 |
3.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.9 GHz |
4.6 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.3 GHz |
65 W | TDP | 65 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
38.0x | Multiplier | 29.0x |
UHD Graphics 630 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |