Key Differences
In short — Core i5-9400F outperforms the cheaper Core i5-4670K on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Core i5-4670K is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i5-9400F is 2046 days newer than the cheaper Core i5-4670K.
Advantages of Intel Core i5-9400F
- Performs up to 1% better in Red Dead Redemption 2 than Core i5-4670K - 158 vs 157 FPS
- Consumes up to 23% less energy than Intel Core i5-4670K - 65 vs 84 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i5-4670K - 6 vs 4 threads
Advantages of Intel Core i5-4670K
- Up to 44% cheaper than Core i5-9400F - £71.18 vs £127.95
- Up to 44% better value when playing Red Dead Redemption 2 than Core i5-9400F - £0.45 vs £0.81 per FPS
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i5-9400F doesn't have integrated graphics
Red Dead Redemption 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Highest
Buy for £127.95 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 164 minutes ago
Desktop • Jun 2nd, 2013
FPS
157
99%
Value, £/FPS
£0.45/FPS
100%
Price, £
£71.18
100%
Value Winner
Buy for £71.18 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 164 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Highest
Desktop • Jan 8th, 2019
Desktop • Jun 2nd, 2013
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i5-9400F | vs | Intel Core i5-4670K |
---|---|---|
Jan 8th, 2019 | Release Date | Jun 2nd, 2013 |
Core i5 | Collection | Core i5 |
Coffee Lake | Codename | Haswell |
Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | Intel Socket 1150 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 4 |
6 | Threads | 4 |
2.9 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.4 GHz |
4.1 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
65 W | TDP | 84 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
29.0x | Multiplier | 34.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 4600 |
No | Overclockable | Yes |