Key Differences
In short — Core i9-10900F outperforms the cheaper Core i5-7600K on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Core i5-7600K is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i9-10900F is 1213 days newer than the cheaper Core i5-7600K.
Advantages of Intel Core i5-7600K
- Up to 39% cheaper than Core i9-10900F - £151.0 vs £246.78
- Up to 37% better value when playing Dying Light 2: Stay Human than Core i9-10900F - £1.14 vs £1.81 per FPS
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i9-10900F doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Core i9-10900F
- Performs up to 2% better in Dying Light 2: Stay Human than Core i5-7600K - 136 vs 133 FPS
- Consumes up to 29% less energy than Intel Core i5-7600K - 65 vs 91 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i5-7600K - 20 vs 4 threads
Dying Light 2: Stay Human
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Buy for £151 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 11107 minutes ago
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
136
100%
Value, £/FPS
£1.81/FPS
62%
Price, £
£246.78
61%
FPS Winner
Buy for £246.78 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 11107 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Desktop • Jan 3rd, 2017
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i5-7600K | vs | Intel Core i9-10900F |
---|---|---|
Jan 3rd, 2017 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
Core i5 | Collection | Core i9 |
Kaby Lake | Codename | Comet Lake |
Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 10 |
4 | Threads | 20 |
3.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.8 GHz |
4.2 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.2 GHz |
91 W | TDP | 65 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
38.0x | Multiplier | 28.0x |
HD 630 | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |