In Control, the Core i5-6400 is slightly faster than the Core i3-350M and it's also a better value for money, as it's $30 cheaper!
Core i5-6400
- Up to 1% faster in Control – 248 vs 245 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Control
- Is 5 years and 5 months newer – Jul 02, 2015 vs Jan 07, 2010
- Is 5 years and 5 months newer
- Up to 23% cheaper – $99.99 vs $129.94
- Up to 23% cheaper
- Up to 25% better value in Control – $0.40 vs $0.53/FPS
- Up to 25% better value in Control
Core i3-350M
- Consumes up to 46% less energy – 35 vs 65 Watts
- Consumes up to 46% less energy
Control FPS Calculator
Core i5-6400 vs Core i3-350M: Comparison of performance and price
Core i5-6400
Jul 2nd, 2015
Average FPS
248 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
162 FPS
100%
Price, $
$99.99
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.4/FPS
100%
Core i3-350M
Jan 7th, 2010
Average FPS
245 FPS
99%
Min 1% FPS
160 FPS
99%
Price, $
$129.94
76%
Value, $/FPS
$0.53/FPS
75%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i5-6400 vs Core i3-350M in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i5-6400 vs Core i3-350M in core CPU performance specifications
Core i5-6400
Jul 2nd, 2015
Cores
4-core
100%
L3 Cache
6 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.7 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.3 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2133 MHz
100%
Core i3-350M
Jan 7th, 2010
Cores
2-core
50%
L3 Cache
3 MB
50%
Base Frequency
2.267 GHz
84%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i5-6400 Jul 2nd, 2015 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i3-350M Jan 7th, 2010 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Jul 2nd, 2015 | Released | Jan 7th, 2010 |
| $182.00 | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Laptop |
| LGA1151 | Socket | LGAG1 |
| 65 W | Power Consumption | 35 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2133 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | DDR3 |
| HD Graphics 530 | Integrated GPU | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
