In The Last of Us Part II, the Core i5-7400T is slightly slower than the Core i3-3210. However, it's a better value for money, as it's $81 cheaper!
Core i5-7400T
- Is 4 years and 2 days newer – Jan 03, 2017 vs Jan 01, 2013
- Is 4 years and 2 days newer
- Up to 51% cheaper – $78.02 vs $159.00
- Up to 51% cheaper
- Up to 47% better value in The Last of Us Part II – $0.42 vs $0.79/FPS
- Up to 47% better value in The Last of Us Part II
- Consumes up to 36% less energy – 35 vs 55 Watts
- Consumes up to 36% less energy
Core i3-3210
- Up to 9% faster in The Last of Us Part II – 199 vs 182 FPS
- Up to 9% faster in The Last of Us Part II
The Last of Us Part II FPS Calculator
Core i5-7400T vs Core i3-3210: Comparison of performance and price
Core i5-7400T
Jan 3rd, 2017
Average FPS
182 FPS
91%
Min 1% FPS
136 FPS
91%
Price, $
$78.02
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.42/FPS
100%
Core i3-3210
Jan 1st, 2013
Average FPS
199 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
149 FPS
100%
Price, $
$159
49%
Value, $/FPS
$0.79/FPS
53%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i5-7400T vs Core i3-3210 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i5-7400T vs Core i3-3210 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
75%
Turbo Frequency
3 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2400 MHz
100%
Core i3-3210
Jan 1st, 2013
Cores
2-core
50%
L3 Cache
3 MB
50%
Base Frequency
3.2 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i5-7400T Jan 3rd, 2017 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i3-3210 Jan 1st, 2013 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Jan 3rd, 2017 | Released | Jan 1st, 2013 |
| – | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1151 | Socket | LGA1155 |
35 W | Power Consumption | 55 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2400 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | DDR3 |
| HD 630 | Integrated GPU | Intel HD 2500 |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
