In Atomfall, the Core i9-9900 is faster than the Core i7-620M. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i9-9900
- Up to 15% faster in Atomfall – 217 vs 188 FPS
- Up to 15% faster in Atomfall
- Is 9 years and 3 months newer – Apr 23, 2019 vs Jan 07, 2010
- Is 9 years and 3 months newer
Core i7-620M
- Consumes up to 46% less energy – 35 vs 65 Watts
- Consumes up to 46% less energy
Atomfall FPS Calculator
Core i9-9900 vs Core i7-620M: Comparison of performance and price
Core i9-9900
Apr 23rd, 2019
Average FPS
217 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
163 FPS
100%
Price, $
$499.99
100%
Value, $/FPS
$2.3/FPS
100%
All items are out of stock
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i9-9900 vs Core i7-620M in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i9-9900 vs Core i7-620M in core CPU performance specifications
Core i9-9900
Apr 23rd, 2019
Cores
8-core
100%
L3 Cache
16 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.1 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
5 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2666 MHz
100%
Core i7-620M
Jan 7th, 2010
Cores
2-core
25%
L3 Cache
4 MB
25%
Base Frequency
2.677 GHz
86%
Turbo Frequency
3.333 GHz
67%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1066 MHz
40%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i9-9900 Apr 23rd, 2019 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i7-620M Jan 7th, 2010 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Apr 23rd, 2019 | Released | Jan 7th, 2010 |
| $423.00 | MSRP | $332.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Laptop |
| LGA1151 | Socket | Intel BGA 1288 |
| 65 W | Power Consumption | 35 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 2666 MHz (DDR4) | RAM | 1066 MHz (DDR3) |
| UHD Graphics 630 | Integrated GPU | HD Graphics (Ironlake) |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
