Key Differences
In short — Core i5-11600 outperforms the cheaper Phenom II X4 925 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Phenom II X4 925 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i5-11600 is 4327 days newer than the cheaper Phenom II X4 925.
Advantages of AMD Phenom II X4 925
- Up to 89% cheaper than Core i5-11600 - €25.22 vs €234.96
- Up to 86% better value when playing Lost Ark than Core i5-11600 - €0.12 vs €0.83 per FPS
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i5-11600 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Core i5-11600
- Performs up to 30% better in Lost Ark than Phenom II X4 925 - 283 vs 218 FPS
- Consumes up to 32% less energy than AMD Phenom II X4 925 - 65 vs 95 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD Phenom II X4 925 - 12 vs 4 threads
Lost Ark
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Desktop • May 11th, 2009
FPS
218
77.03180212014135%
Value, €/FPS
€0.12/FPS
100%
Price, €
€25.22
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €25.22 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 3695 minutes ago
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
FPS
283
100%
Value, €/FPS
€0.83/FPS
14.457831325301203%
Price, €
€234.96
10%
FPS Winner
Buy for €234.96 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 3705 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Desktop • May 11th, 2009
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • May 11th, 2009
Single-Core
320
15.080113100848255%
Multi-Core
930
11.358085002442598%
AMD Phenom II X4 925 | vs | Intel Core i5-11600 |
---|---|---|
May 11th, 2009 | Release Date | Mar 16th, 2021 |
Phenom II X4 | Collection | Core i5 |
Deneb | Codename | Rocket Lake |
AMD Socket AM3 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 6 |
4 | Threads | 12 |
2.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.8 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.8 GHz |
95 W | TDP | 65 W |
45 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
14.0x | Multiplier | 28.0x |
On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |