Key Differences
In short — Core i9-10900F outperforms the cheaper Core i7-6900K on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Core i7-6900K is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i9-10900F is 1430 days newer than the cheaper Core i7-6900K.
Advantages of Intel Core i7-6900K
- Up to 45% cheaper than Core i9-10900F - €188.88 vs €340.43
- Up to 41% better value when playing Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Core i9-10900F - €1.03 vs €1.76 per FPS
Advantages of Intel Core i9-10900F
- Performs up to 5% better in Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Core i7-6900K - 193 vs 183 FPS
- Consumes up to 54% less energy than Intel Core i7-6900K - 65 vs 140 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i7-6900K - 20 vs 16 threads
Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • May 31st, 2016
FPS
183
94%
Value, €/FPS
€1.03/FPS
100%
Price, €
€188.88
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €188.88 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 3 minutes ago
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
193
100%
Value, €/FPS
€1.76/FPS
58%
Price, €
€340.43
55%
FPS Winner
Buy for €340.43 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 2 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • May 31st, 2016
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i7-6900K | vs | Intel Core i9-10900F |
---|---|---|
May 31st, 2016 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
Core i7 | Collection | Core i9 |
Broadwell-E | Codename | Comet Lake |
Intel Socket 2011-3 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 10 |
16 | Threads | 20 |
3.2 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.8 GHz |
3.7 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.2 GHz |
140 W | TDP | 65 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
32.0x | Multiplier | 28.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |