In Atomfall, the Core i3-3217U is slightly slower than the Core i5-9600K. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i3-3217U
- Consumes up to 82% less energy – 17 vs 95 Watts
- Consumes up to 82% less energy
Core i5-9600K
- Up to 16% faster in Atomfall – 213 vs 183 FPS
- Up to 16% faster in Atomfall
- Is 6 years and 4 months newer – Oct 19, 2018 vs Jun 01, 2012
- Is 6 years and 4 months newer
Atomfall FPS Calculator
Core i3-3217U vs Core i5-9600K: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
Core i5-9600K
Oct 19th, 2018
Average FPS
213 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
160 FPS
100%
Price, $
$159
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.74/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i3-3217U vs Core i5-9600K in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i3-3217U vs Core i5-9600K in core CPU performance specifications
Core i3-3217U
Jun 1st, 2012
Cores
2-core
33%
L3 Cache
3 MB
33%
Base Frequency
1.8 GHz
49%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. unknown RAM Speed
MHz
Core i5-9600K
Oct 19th, 2018
Cores
6-core
100%
L3 Cache
9 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.7 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.6 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2666 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i3-3217U Jun 1st, 2012 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i5-9600K Oct 19th, 2018 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Jun 1st, 2012 | Released | Oct 19th, 2018 |
| – | MSRP | – |
Laptop | Segment | Desktop |
| Intel BGA 1023 | Socket | LGA1151 |
17 W | Power Consumption | 95 W |
| Other Features | ||
| unknown | RAM | 2666 MHz (DDR4) |
| Intel HD 4000 | Integrated GPU | UHD 630 |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
