Buy on Amazon
£141.26
In Stock
Availability
Availability
Availability
Availability
Key Differences
In short — Core i9-10900F outperforms the cheaper Core i7-2700K on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Core i7-2700K is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i9-10900F is 3111 days newer than the cheaper Core i7-2700K.
Advantages of Intel Core i7-2700K
- Up to 43% cheaper than Core i9-10900F - £141.26 vs £246.78
- Up to 41% better value when playing Stray than Core i9-10900F - £0.79 vs £1.33 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 4% better in Stray than Core i7-2700K - 185 vs 178 FPS
- Consumes up to 32% less energy than Intel Core i7-2700K - 65 vs 95 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i7-2700K - 20 vs 8 threads
Stray
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Core i7-2700K
Desktop • Oct 24th, 2011
FPS
178
96%
Value, £/FPS
£0.79/FPS
100%
Price, £
£141.26
100%
Value Winner
Intel Core i7-2700K 3.5 GHz Quad Core Processor (Socket 1155, 8MB L3 Cache, HyperThreading Technology, Retail)
Buy for £141.26 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 15402 minutes ago
Core i9-10900F
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
185
100%
Value, £/FPS
£1.33/FPS
59%
Price, £
£246.78
57%
FPS Winner
Intel Core i9-10900F Desktop Processor 10 Cores up to 5.2 GHz Without Processor Graphics LGA 1200 (Intel 400 Series chipset) 65W
Buy for £246.78 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 15403 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Core i7-2700K
Desktop • Oct 24th, 2011
Core i9-10900F
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i7-2700K | vs | Intel Core i9-10900F |
|---|---|---|
| Oct 24th, 2011 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
| Core i7 | Collection | Core i9 |
| Sandy Bridge | Codename | Comet Lake |
| Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| 4 | Cores | 10 |
| 8 | Threads | 20 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.8 GHz |
| 3.9 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.2 GHz |
| 95 W | TDP | 65 W |
| 32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
35.0x | Multiplier | 28.0x |
Intel HD 3000 | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |
Similar CPU Comparisons
Select from the most popular similar processor comparisons. Most compared processor combinations, including the currently selected ones, are at the top.
