Key Differences
In short — Core i9-13900F 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 i9-13900F is 3412 days newer than the cheaper Core i7-4820K.
Advantages of Intel Core i7-4820K
- Up to 54% cheaper than Core i9-13900F - $146.15 vs $318.06
- Up to 41% better value when playing No Man's Sky than Core i9-13900F - $1.01 vs $1.71 per FPS
Advantages of Intel Core i9-13900F
- Performs up to 29% better in No Man's Sky than Core i7-4820K - 207 vs 160 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i7-4820K - 32 vs 8 threads
No Man's Sky
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2013
FPS
160
77%
Value, €/FPS
€1.01/FPS
100%
Price, €
€162.23
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €162.23 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 168 minutes ago
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2023
FPS
207
100%
Value, €/FPS
€1.71/FPS
59%
Price, €
€353.05
45%
FPS Winner
Buy for €353.05 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 167 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2013
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2023
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i7-4820K | vs | Intel Core i9-13900F |
---|---|---|
Sep 1st, 2013 | Release Date | Jan 4th, 2023 |
Core i7 | Collection | Core i9 |
Ivy Bridge E | Codename | Raptor Lake |
Intel Socket 2011 | Socket | Intel Socket 1700 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 24 |
8 | Threads | 32 |
3.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.0 GHz |
3.9 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.6 GHz |
130 W | TDP | Not Available |
22 nm | Process Size | 10 nm |
37.0x | Multiplier | 20.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |