Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — Core i5-10400F outperforms the more expensive Ryzen Threadripper 1920X on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck! The better performing Core i5-10400F is 994 days newer than the more expensive Ryzen Threadripper 1920X.
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i5-10400F - 24 vs 12 threads
Advantages of Intel Core i5-10400F
- Performs up to 2% better in The Last of Us Part I than Ryzen Threadripper 1920X - 135 vs 133 FPS
- Up to 64% cheaper than Ryzen Threadripper 1920X - $97.5 vs $270.0
- Up to 65% better value when playing The Last of Us Part I than Ryzen Threadripper 1920X - $0.72 vs $2.03 per FPS
- Consumes up to 64% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X - 65 vs 180 Watts
The Last of Us Part I
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Buy for $270 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 107 minutes ago
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
135
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.72/FPS
100%
Price, $
$97.5
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for $97.5 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 106 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Aug 10th, 2017
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X | vs | Intel Core i5-10400F |
---|---|---|
Aug 10th, 2017 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
Ryzen Threadripper | Collection | Core i5 |
Whitehaven | Codename | Comet Lake |
AMD Socket SP3r2 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
12 | Cores | 6 |
24 | Threads | 12 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.9 GHz |
4.0 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.3 GHz |
180 W | TDP | 65 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
35.0x | Multiplier | 29.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |