In Rust, the Core i3-3220 is slightly slower than the Core i5-9400F. However, it's a better value for money, as it's $28 cheaper!
Core i3-3220
- Up to 23% cheaper – $91.98 vs $119.99
- Up to 23% cheaper
- Up to 19% better value in Rust – $0.43 vs $0.53/FPS
- Up to 19% better value in Rust
- Consumes up to 15% less energy – 55 vs 65 Watts
- Consumes up to 15% less energy
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
Core i5-9400F
- Up to 8% faster in Rust – 226 vs 210 FPS
- Up to 8% faster in Rust
- Is 6 years and 4 months newer – Jan 08, 2019 vs Sep 03, 2012
- Is 6 years and 4 months newer
Rust FPS Calculator
Core i3-3220 vs Core i5-9400F: Comparison of performance and price
Core i3-3220
Sep 3rd, 2012
Average FPS
210 FPS
93%
Min 1% FPS
41 FPS
75%
Price, $
$91.98
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.43/FPS
100%
Core i5-9400F
Jan 8th, 2019
Average FPS
226 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
55 FPS
100%
Price, $
$119.99
76%
Value, $/FPS
$0.53/FPS
81%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i3-3220 vs Core i5-9400F in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i3-3220 vs Core i5-9400F in core CPU performance specifications
Core i3-3220
Sep 3rd, 2012
Cores
2-core
33%
L3 Cache
3 MB
33%
Base Frequency
3.3 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Core i5-9400F
Jan 8th, 2019
Cores
6-core
100%
L3 Cache
9 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.9 GHz
88%
Turbo Frequency
4.1 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2666 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i3-3220 Sep 3rd, 2012 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i5-9400F Jan 8th, 2019 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Sep 3rd, 2012 | Released | Jan 8th, 2019 |
| – | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1155 | Socket | LGA1151 |
55 W | Power Consumption | 65 W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 2666 MHz (DDR4) |
Intel HD 2500 | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
