Key Differences
In short — Core i9-10900F outperforms the cheaper Core i5-2500 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Core i5-2500 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i9-10900F is 3399 days newer than the cheaper Core i5-2500.
Advantages of Intel Core i5-2500
- Up to 93% cheaper than Core i9-10900F - €24.99 vs €340.43
- Up to 92% better value when playing Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II than Core i9-10900F - €0.13 vs €1.63 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 9% better in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II than Core i5-2500 - 209 vs 192 FPS
- Consumes up to 32% less energy than Intel Core i5-2500 - 65 vs 95 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i5-2500 - 20 vs 4 threads
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Jan 9th, 2011
FPS
192
91%
Value, €/FPS
€0.13/FPS
100%
Price, €
€24.99
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €24.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 6 minutes ago
Buy for €340.43 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 7 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Jan 9th, 2011
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i5-2500 | vs | Intel Core i9-10900F |
---|---|---|
Jan 9th, 2011 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
Core i5 | Collection | Core i9 |
Sandy Bridge | Codename | Comet Lake |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 10 |
4 | Threads | 20 |
3.3 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.8 GHz |
3.7 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.2 GHz |
95 W | TDP | 65 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
33.0x | Multiplier | 28.0x |
Intel HD 2000 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |