In Atomfall, the Core i5-3317U is slightly slower than the Core i5-9400F. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i5-3317U
- Consumes up to 74% less energy – 17 vs 65 Watts
- Consumes up to 74% 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 13% faster in Atomfall – 210 vs 186 FPS
- Up to 13% faster in Atomfall
- Is 6 years and 7 months newer – Jan 08, 2019 vs Jun 01, 2012
- Is 6 years and 7 months newer
Atomfall FPS Calculator
Core i5-3317U vs Core i5-9400F: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
Core i5-9400F
Jan 8th, 2019
Average FPS
210 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
157 FPS
100%
Price, $
$119.99
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.57/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i5-3317U vs Core i5-9400F in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i5-3317U vs Core i5-9400F in core CPU performance specifications
Core i5-3317U
Jun 1st, 2012
Cores
2-core
33%
L3 Cache
3 MB
33%
Base Frequency
1.7 GHz
59%
Turbo Frequency
2.6 GHz
63%
Max. unknown RAM Speed
MHz
Core i5-9400F
Jan 8th, 2019
Cores
6-core
100%
L3 Cache
9 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.9 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.1 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2666 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i5-3317U Jun 1st, 2012 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i5-9400F Jan 8th, 2019 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Jun 1st, 2012 | Released | Jan 8th, 2019 |
| – | MSRP | – |
Laptop | Segment | Desktop |
| Intel BGA 1023 | Socket | LGA1151 |
17 W | Power Consumption | 65 W |
| Other Features | ||
| unknown | RAM | 2666 MHz (DDR4) |
Intel HD 4000 | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
