i5-10400 vs i5-9600KF - GRID Autosport R9 Nano - Game Performance Benchmarks


i5-10400 i5-9600KF

Multi-Thread Performance

12716 Pts
13507 Pts

Single-Thread Performance

2609 Pts
2735 Pts

GRID Autosport

i5-10400 vs i5-9600KF in GRID Autosport using R9 Nano - CPU Performance comparison at Ultra, High, Medium, and Low Quality Settings with 1080p, 1440p, Ultrawide, 4K resolutions

i5-10400 i5-9600KF

Ultra Quality
Resolution Frames Per Second
1080p
85.2 FPS
1080p
84.5 FPS
1440p
83.4 FPS
1440p
83.1 FPS
2160p
55.6 FPS
2160p
55.4 FPS
w1440p
74.3 FPS
w1440p
74.1 FPS
High Quality
Resolution Frames Per Second
1080p
137.7 FPS
1080p
136.7 FPS
1440p
135.2 FPS
1440p
134.8 FPS
2160p
95.8 FPS
2160p
95.5 FPS
w1440p
122.6 FPS
w1440p
122.3 FPS
Medium Quality
Resolution Frames Per Second
1080p
190.1 FPS
1080p
188.9 FPS
1440p
187.0 FPS
1440p
186.5 FPS
2160p
135.9 FPS
2160p
135.5 FPS
w1440p
170.9 FPS
w1440p
170.5 FPS
Low Quality
Resolution Frames Per Second
1080p
295.0 FPS
1080p
293.3 FPS
1440p
290.6 FPS
1440p
289.8 FPS
2160p
216.3 FPS
2160p
215.7 FPS
w1440p
267.5 FPS
w1440p
266.9 FPS
i5-10400
  • The i5-10400 has higher Level 2 Cache. Data/instructions which have to be processed can be loaded from the fast L2 and the CPU does not have to wait for the very slow DDR RAM
  • The i5-10400 has higher Level 3 Cache. This is useful when you have substantial multiprocessing workloads, many computationally intense simultaneous processes. More likely on a server, less on a personally used computer for interactive desktop workloads.
  • The i5-10400 has more cores. The benefit of having more cores is that the system can handle more threads. Each core can handle a separate stream of data. This architecture greatly increases the performance of a system that is running concurrent applications.
  • The i5-10400 has more threads. Larger programs are divided into threads (small sections) so that the processor can execute them simultaneously to get faster execution.
  • For some games, a cpu with a higher clock speed, or in a technical name IPC (Instructions per clock), has better results than other CPU's with higher core count and lower core speed.
  • The i5-10400 has a higher turbo clock boost. Turbo Boost is a CPU feature that will run CPU clock speed faster than its base clock, if certain conditions are present. It will enable older software that runs on fewer cores, to perform better on newer hardware. Since games are software too, it is also applicable to them.
i5-9600KF
  • The i5-9600KF is more power efficient and generates less heat.
  • The i5-9600KF has a smaller process size. The faster a transistor can toggle on and off, the faster it can do work. And transistors that turn on and off with less energy are more efficient, reducing the operating power, or “dynamic power consumption,” required by a processor.

Compare i5-10400 vs i5-9600KF specifications

i5-10400 vs i5-9600KF Architecture

i5-10400 i5-9600KF
CodenameComet LakeCoffee Lake
GenerationCore i5 (Comet Lake)Core i5 (Coffee Lake Refresh)
MarketDesktopDesktop
Memory SupportDDR4DDR4
Part#unknownBX80684I59600KFBXC80684I5960KFSRFAD
Production StatusActiveActive
ReleasedMay 2020Jan 2019

i5-10400 vs i5-9600KF Cache

i5-10400 i5-9600KF
Cache L164K (per core)64K (per core)
Cache L2256K (per core)256K (per core)
Cache L312MB (shared)9MB (shared)

i5-10400 vs i5-9600KF Cores

i5-10400 i5-9600KF
# of Cores66
# of Threads126
Integrated GraphicsUHD Graphics 630N/A
SMP # CPUs11

i5-10400 vs i5-9600KF Features

i5-10400 i5-9600KF

i5-10400 vs i5-9600KF Notes

i5-10400 i5-9600KF

i5-10400 vs i5-9600KF Performance

i5-10400 i5-9600KF
Base Clock100 MHz100 MHz
Frequency2.9 GHz3.7 GHz
Multiplier29.0x37.0x
Multiplier UnlockedNoYes
TDP65 W95 W
Turbo Clockup to 4.3 GHzup to 4.6 GHz
Voltagevariablevariable

i5-10400 vs i5-9600KF Physical

i5-10400 i5-9600KF
Die Sizeunknownunknown
FoundryIntelIntel
PackageFC-LGA1200FC-LGA1151
Process Size14 nm14 nm
SocketIntel Socket 1200Intel Socket 1151
Transistorsunknownunknown
tCaseMax72°C72°C

Compare i5-10400 vs i5-9600KF in more games


Discussion and Comments

Share Your Comments