In Battlefield 6, the Core i5-3210M is quite a bit slower than the Core i9-10900. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i5-3210M
- Consumes up to 46% less energy – 35 vs 65 Watts
- Consumes up to 46% less energy
Core i9-10900
- Up to 44% faster in Battlefield 6 – 88 vs 61 FPS
- Up to 44% faster in Battlefield 6
- Is 7 years and 10 months newer – Apr 30, 2020 vs Jun 01, 2012
- Is 7 years and 10 months newer
Battlefield 6 FPS Calculator
Core i5-3210M vs Core i9-10900: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
All items are out of stock
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i5-3210M vs Core i9-10900 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i5-3210M vs Core i9-10900 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i5-3210M
Jun 1st, 2012
Cores
2-core
20%
L3 Cache
3 MB
15%
Base Frequency
2.5 GHz
89%
Turbo Frequency
3.1 GHz
60%
Max. unknown RAM Speed
MHz
Core i9-10900
Apr 30th, 2020
Cores
10-core
100%
L3 Cache
20 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.8 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
5.2 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2933 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i5-3210M Jun 1st, 2012 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i9-10900 Apr 30th, 2020 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Jun 1st, 2012 | Released | Apr 30th, 2020 |
| – | MSRP | $483.00 |
Laptop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGAG2 (988B) | Socket | LGA1200 |
35 W | Power Consumption | 65 W |
| Other Features | ||
| unknown | RAM | 2933 MHz (DDR4) |
| Intel HD 4000 | Integrated GPU | UHD Graphics 630 |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
