In Control, the Core i7-950 is slightly slower than the Core i7-9700F. However, it's a much better value for money, as it's $216 cheaper!
Core i7-950
- Up to 87% cheaper – $31.00 vs $246.81
- Up to 87% cheaper
- Up to 88% better value in Control – $0.12 vs $0.99/FPS
- Up to 88% better value in Control
Core i7-9700F
- Up to 2% faster in Control – 249 vs 245 FPS
- Up to 2% faster in Control
- Is 9 years and 10 months newer – Apr 23, 2019 vs Jun 02, 2009
- Is 9 years and 10 months newer
- Consumes up to 50% less energy – 65 vs 130 Watts
- Consumes up to 50% less energy
Control FPS Calculator
Core i7-950 vs Core i7-9700F: Comparison of performance and price
Core i7-950
Jun 2nd, 2009
Average FPS
245 FPS
98%
Min 1% FPS
160 FPS
98%
Price, $
$31
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.12/FPS
100%
Core i7-9700F
Apr 23rd, 2019
Average FPS
249 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
163 FPS
100%
Price, $
$246.81
12%
Value, $/FPS
$0.99/FPS
12%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i7-950 vs Core i7-9700F in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i7-950 vs Core i7-9700F in core CPU performance specifications
Core i7-950
Jun 2nd, 2009
Cores
4-core
50%
L3 Cache
8 MB
67%
Base Frequency
3.066 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.333 GHz
71%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Core i7-9700F
Apr 23rd, 2019
Cores
8-core
100%
L3 Cache
12 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3 GHz
98%
Turbo Frequency
4.7 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2666 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i7-950 Jun 2nd, 2009 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i7-9700F Apr 23rd, 2019 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Jun 2nd, 2009 | Released | Apr 23rd, 2019 |
| – | MSRP | $333.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1366 | Socket | LGA1151 |
| 130 W | Power Consumption | 65 W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 2666 MHz (DDR4) |
| No Integrated Graphics | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
