Key Differences
In short — Core i5-10400F outperforms the cheaper FX-6350 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-6350 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i5-10400F is 2558 days newer than the cheaper FX-6350.
Advantages of AMD FX-6350
- Up to 46% cheaper than Core i5-10400F - £52.95 vs £98.8
- Up to 41% better value when playing Elden Ring than Core i5-10400F - £0.48 vs £0.81 per FPS
Advantages of Intel Core i5-10400F
- Performs up to 10% better in Elden Ring than FX-6350 - 122 vs 111 FPS
- Consumes up to 48% less energy than AMD FX-6350 - 65 vs 125 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-6350 - 12 vs 6 threads
Elden Ring
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Maximum
Buy for £52.95 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 2195 minutes ago
Buy for £98.8 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 2195 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Maximum
Desktop • Apr 29th, 2013
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-6350 | vs | Intel Core i5-10400F |
---|---|---|
Apr 29th, 2013 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
FX | Collection | Core i5 |
Vishera | Codename | Comet Lake |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 6 |
6 | Threads | 12 |
3.9 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.9 GHz |
4.2 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.3 GHz |
125 W | TDP | 65 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
19.5x | Multiplier | 29.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |