Key Differences
In short — Ryzen Threadripper 2950X outperforms the cheaper Core i3-4150 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Core i3-4150 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Ryzen Threadripper 2950X is 1583 days newer than the cheaper Core i3-4150.
Advantages of Intel Core i3-4150
- Up to 96% cheaper than Ryzen Threadripper 2950X - $32.9 vs $786.04
- Up to 96% better value when playing Starfield than Ryzen Threadripper 2950X - $0.69 vs $15.58 per FPS
- Consumes up to 70% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X - 54 vs 180 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X
- Performs up to 6% better in Starfield than Core i3-4150 - 56 vs 53 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i3-4150 - 32 vs 4 threads
Starfield
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Buy for €36.52 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 16066 minutes ago
Desktop • Aug 31st, 2018
FPS
56
100%
Value, €/FPS
€15.58/FPS
4%
Price, €
€872.5
4%
FPS Winner
Buy for €872.5 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 16066 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • May 1st, 2014
Desktop • Aug 31st, 2018
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i3-4150 | vs | AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X |
---|---|---|
May 1st, 2014 | Release Date | Aug 31st, 2018 |
Core i3 | Collection | Ryzen Threadripper |
Haswell | Codename | Colfax |
Intel Socket 1150 | Socket | AMD Socket SP3r2 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 16 |
4 | Threads | 32 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.4 GHz |
54 W | TDP | 180 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 12 nm |
25.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
Intel HD 4400 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |