In Atomfall, the Core i5-7400T is slower than the Core Ultra 9 275HX. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i5-7400T
- Consumes up to 36% less energy – 35 vs 55 Watts
- Consumes up to 36% less energy
Core Ultra 9 275HX
- Up to 22% faster in Atomfall – 246 vs 201 FPS
- Up to 22% faster in Atomfall
- Is 8 years and 10 days newer – Jan 13, 2025 vs Jan 03, 2017
- Is 8 years and 10 days newer
Atomfall FPS Calculator
Core i5-7400T vs Core Ultra 9 275HX: Comparison of performance and price
Core i5-7400T
Jan 3rd, 2017
Average FPS
201 FPS
82%
Min 1% FPS
151 FPS
82%
Price, $
$78.02
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.38/FPS
100%
Core Ultra 9 275HX
Jan 13th, 2025
Average FPS
246 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
184 FPS
100%
Price, $
...
Value, $/FPS
...
All items are out of stock
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i5-7400T vs Core Ultra 9 275HX in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i5-7400T vs Core Ultra 9 275HX in core CPU performance specifications
Core i5-7400T
Jan 3rd, 2017
Cores
4-core
17%
L3 Cache
6 MB
17%
Base Frequency
2.4 GHz
89%
Turbo Frequency
3 GHz
56%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2400 MHz
38%
Core Ultra 9 275HX
Jan 13th, 2025
Cores
24-core
100%
L3 Cache
36 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.7 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
5.4 GHz
100%
Max. DDR5 RAM Speed
6400 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i5-7400T Jan 3rd, 2017 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core Ultra 9 275HX Jan 13th, 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Jan 3rd, 2017 | Released | Jan 13th, 2025 |
| – | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Laptop |
| LGA1151 | Socket | Intel BGA 2114 |
35 W | Power Consumption | 55 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2400 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | 6400 MHz (DDR5) |
| HD 630 | Integrated GPU | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
