Key Differences
In short — Core i5-10400 outperforms the cheaper Ryzen Threadripper 1900X on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Ryzen Threadripper 1900X is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i5-10400 is 973 days newer than the cheaper Ryzen Threadripper 1900X.
Advantages of Intel Core i5-10400
- Performs up to 2% better in Dead Space than Ryzen Threadripper 1900X - 152 vs 149 FPS
- Consumes up to 64% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X - 65 vs 180 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X
- Up to 12% cheaper than Core i5-10400 - $80.42 vs $91.04
- Up to 9% better value when playing Dead Space than Core i5-10400 - $0.6 vs $0.66 per FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i5-10400 - 16 vs 12 threads
Dead Space
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
152
100%
Value, €/FPS
€0.66/FPS
90%
Price, €
€101.05
88%
FPS Winner
Buy for €101.05 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 12725 minutes ago
Desktop • Aug 31st, 2017
FPS
149
98%
Value, €/FPS
€0.6/FPS
100%
Price, €
€89.27
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €89.27 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 12725 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Desktop • Aug 31st, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i5-10400 | vs | AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X |
---|---|---|
Apr 30th, 2020 | Release Date | Aug 31st, 2017 |
Core i5 | Collection | Ryzen Threadripper |
Comet Lake | Codename | Whitehaven |
Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | AMD Socket SP3r2 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 8 |
12 | Threads | 16 |
2.9 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
4.3 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.0 GHz |
65 W | TDP | 180 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
29.0x | Multiplier | 38.0x |
UHD Graphics 630 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |