In Deathloop, the Core i3-3240 is slightly slower than the Core i9-10900KF. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i3-3240
- Consumes up to 56% less energy – 55 vs 125 Watts
- Consumes up to 56% 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 i9-10900KF
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop – 224 vs 222 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Deathloop
- Is 7 years and 7 months newer – Apr 30, 2020 vs Sep 03, 2012
- Is 7 years and 7 months newer
Deathloop FPS Calculator
Core i3-3240 vs Core i9-10900KF: Comparison of performance and price
Core i3-3240
Sep 3rd, 2012
Average FPS
222 FPS
99%
Min 1% FPS
167 FPS
99%
Price, $
$128.99
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.58/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i3-3240 vs Core i9-10900KF in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i3-3240 vs Core i9-10900KF in core CPU performance specifications
Core i3-3240
Sep 3rd, 2012
Cores
2-core
20%
L3 Cache
3 MB
15%
Base Frequency
3.4 GHz
92%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Core i9-10900KF
Apr 30th, 2020
Cores
10-core
100%
L3 Cache
20 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.7 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
5.3 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2933 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i3-3240 Sep 3rd, 2012 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i9-10900KF Apr 30th, 2020 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Sep 3rd, 2012 | Released | Apr 30th, 2020 |
| – | MSRP | $509.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1155 | Socket | LGA1200 |
55 W | Power Consumption | 125 W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 2933 MHz (DDR4) |
Intel HD 2500 | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
