In The Last of Us Part I, the Core i5-10400 is slightly slower than the Core i3-330M and it's also a much worse value for money, as it's $48 more expensive!
Core i5-10400
- Is 10 years and 3 months newer – Apr 30, 2020 vs Jan 07, 2010
- Is 10 years and 3 months newer
Core i3-330M
- Up to 11% faster in The Last of Us Part I – 250 vs 225 FPS
- Up to 11% faster in The Last of Us Part I
- Up to 33% cheaper – $98.95 vs $147.00
- Up to 33% cheaper
- Up to 40% better value in The Last of Us Part I – $0.39 vs $0.65/FPS
- Up to 40% better value in The Last of Us Part I
- Consumes up to 46% less energy – 35 vs 65 Watts
- Consumes up to 46% less energy
The Last of Us Part I FPS Calculator
Core i5-10400 vs Core i3-330M: Comparison of performance and price
Core i5-10400
Apr 30th, 2020
Average FPS
225 FPS
90%
Min 1% FPS
168 FPS
89%
Price, $
$147
67%
Value, $/FPS
$0.65/FPS
60%
Core i3-330M
Jan 7th, 2010
Average FPS
250 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
188 FPS
100%
Price, $
$98.95
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.39/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i5-10400 vs Core i3-330M in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i5-10400 vs Core i3-330M in core CPU performance specifications
Core i5-10400
Apr 30th, 2020
Cores
6-core
100%
L3 Cache
12 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.9 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.3 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2666 MHz
100%
Core i3-330M
Jan 7th, 2010
Cores
2-core
33%
L3 Cache
3 MB
25%
Base Frequency
2.133 GHz
74%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1066 MHz
40%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i5-10400 Apr 30th, 2020 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i3-330M Jan 7th, 2010 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Apr 30th, 2020 | Released | Jan 7th, 2010 |
| – | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Laptop |
| LGA1200 | Socket | LGAG1 |
| 65 W | Power Consumption | 35 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2666 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | 1066 MHz (DDR3) |
| UHD Graphics 630 | Integrated GPU | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
