In Deathloop, the Core i9-7940X is slightly slower than the Core i3-330M. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i9-7940X
- Is 7 years and 7 months newer – Sep 01, 2017 vs Jan 07, 2010
- Is 7 years and 7 months newer
Core i3-330M
- Up to 3% faster in Deathloop – 229 vs 222 FPS
- Up to 3% faster in Deathloop
- Consumes up to 79% less energy – 35 vs 165 Watts
- Consumes up to 79% less energy
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
Deathloop FPS Calculator
Core i9-7940X vs Core i3-330M: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
Core i3-330M
Jan 7th, 2010
Average FPS
229 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
171 FPS
100%
Price, $
$98.95
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.43/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i9-7940X vs Core i3-330M in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i9-7940X vs Core i3-330M in core CPU performance specifications
Core i9-7940X
Sep 1st, 2017
Cores
14-core
100%
L3 Cache
19.25 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.1 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.4 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2666 MHz
100%
Core i3-330M
Jan 7th, 2010
Cores
2-core
14%
L3 Cache
3 MB
16%
Base Frequency
2.133 GHz
69%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1066 MHz
40%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i9-7940X Sep 1st, 2017 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i3-330M Jan 7th, 2010 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Sep 1st, 2017 | Released | Jan 7th, 2010 |
| $1,399.00 | MSRP | – |
Desktop | Segment | Laptop |
| LGA2066 | Socket | LGAG1 |
| 165 W | Power Consumption | 35 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2666 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | 1066 MHz (DDR3) |
| No Integrated Graphics | Integrated GPU | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
