In Atomfall, the Core i5-7400T is slightly faster than the Core i3-3110M. However, it's a slightly worse value for money, as it's $8 more expensive!
Core i5-7400T
- Up to 8% faster in Atomfall – 200 vs 185 FPS
- Up to 8% faster in Atomfall
- Is 4 years and 7 months newer – Jan 03, 2017 vs Jun 01, 2012
- Is 4 years and 7 months newer
Core i3-3110M
- Up to 10% cheaper – $69.95 vs $78.02
- Up to 10% cheaper
- Up to 5% better value in Atomfall – $0.37 vs $0.39/FPS
- Up to 5% better value in Atomfall
Atomfall FPS Calculator
Core i5-7400T vs Core i3-3110M: Comparison of performance and price
Core i5-7400T
Jan 3rd, 2017
Average FPS
200 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
150 FPS
100%
Price, $
$78.02
89%
Value, $/FPS
$0.39/FPS
95%
Core i3-3110M
Jun 1st, 2012
Average FPS
185 FPS
92%
Min 1% FPS
139 FPS
93%
Price, $
$69.95
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.37/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i5-7400T vs Core i3-3110M in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i5-7400T vs Core i3-3110M in core CPU performance specifications
Core i5-7400T
Jan 3rd, 2017
Cores
4-core
100%
L3 Cache
6 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.4 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2400 MHz
100%
Core i3-3110M
Jun 1st, 2012
Cores
2-core
50%
L3 Cache
3 MB
50%
Base Frequency
2.4 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. unknown RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i5-7400T Jan 3rd, 2017 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i3-3110M Jun 1st, 2012 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Jan 3rd, 2017 | Released | Jun 1st, 2012 |
| – | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Laptop |
| LGA1151 | Socket | Intel BGA 1023 |
| 35 W | Power Consumption | 35 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2400 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | unknown |
| HD 630 | Integrated GPU | Intel HD 4000 |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
