Key Differences
In short — Core i7-10700F outperforms the cheaper Core i7-4820K on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Core i7-4820K is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i7-10700F is 2433 days newer than the cheaper Core i7-4820K.
Advantages of Intel Core i7-4820K
- Up to 9% cheaper than Core i7-10700F - $146.15 vs $160.13
- Up to 2% better value when playing The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt than Core i7-10700F - $1.03 vs $1.05 per FPS
Advantages of Intel Core i7-10700F
- Performs up to 8% better in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt than Core i7-4820K - 170 vs 157 FPS
- Consumes up to 50% less energy than Intel Core i7-4820K - 65 vs 130 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i7-4820K - 16 vs 8 threads
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra+
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2013
FPS
157
92%
Value, €/FPS
€1.03/FPS
100%
Price, €
€162.23
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €162.23 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 6 minutes ago
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
170
100%
Value, €/FPS
€1.05/FPS
98%
Price, €
€177.74
91%
FPS Winner
Buy for €177.74 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 7 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra+
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2013
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i7-4820K | vs | Intel Core i7-10700F |
---|---|---|
Sep 1st, 2013 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
Core i7 | Collection | Core i7 |
Ivy Bridge E | Codename | Comet Lake |
Intel Socket 2011 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 8 |
8 | Threads | 16 |
3.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.9 GHz |
3.9 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.8 GHz |
130 W | TDP | 65 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
37.0x | Multiplier | 29.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |