Key Differences
In short — Ryzen Threadripper 3960X outperforms the cheaper Core i5-10400F on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Core i5-10400F is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Ryzen Threadripper 3960X is 157 days older than the cheaper Core i5-10400F.
Advantages of Intel Core i5-10400F
- Up to 92% cheaper than Ryzen Threadripper 3960X - £98.8 vs £1250.0
- Up to 92% better value when playing Control than Ryzen Threadripper 3960X - £0.49 vs £6.16 per FPS
- Consumes up to 77% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3960X - 65 vs 280 Watts
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3960X
- Performs up to 0% better in Control than Core i5-10400F - 203 vs 202 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i5-10400F - 48 vs 12 threads
Control
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
202
99%
Value, £/FPS
£0.49/FPS
100%
Price, £
£98.8
100%
Value Winner
Buy for £98.8 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 82 minutes ago
Desktop • Nov 25th, 2019
FPS
203
100%
Value, £/FPS
£6.16/FPS
7%
Price, £
£1250
7%
FPS Winner
Buy for £1,250 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 82 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Desktop • Nov 25th, 2019
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i5-10400F | vs | AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3960X |
---|---|---|
Apr 30th, 2020 | Release Date | Nov 25th, 2019 |
Core i5 | Collection | Ryzen Threadripper |
Comet Lake | Codename | Castle Peak |
Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | AMD Socket TRX4 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 24 |
12 | Threads | 48 |
2.9 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
4.3 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.5 GHz |
65 W | TDP | 280 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 7 nm |
29.0x | Multiplier | 38.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |