Key Differences
In short — Core i5-9400F outperforms the cheaper FX-8150 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-8150 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i5-9400F is 2645 days newer than the cheaper FX-8150.
Advantages of AMD FX-8150
- Up to 43% cheaper than Core i5-9400F - $64.03 vs $112.0
- Up to 36% better value when playing Ready or Not than Core i5-9400F - $0.27 vs $0.42 per FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i5-9400F - 8 vs 6 threads
Advantages of Intel Core i5-9400F
- Performs up to 14% better in Ready or Not than FX-8150 - 266 vs 233 FPS
- Consumes up to 48% less energy than AMD FX-8150 - 65 vs 125 Watts
Ready or Not
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
FPS
233
87.59398496240601%
Value, $/FPS
$0.27/FPS
100%
Price, $
$64.03
100%
Value Winner
Buy for $64.03 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 361030 minutes ago
Desktop • Jan 8th, 2019
FPS
266
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.42/FPS
64.28571428571429%
Price, $
$112
57%
FPS Winner
Buy for $112 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 361031 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
Desktop • Jan 8th, 2019
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8150 | vs | Intel Core i5-9400F |
---|---|---|
Oct 12th, 2011 | Release Date | Jan 8th, 2019 |
FX | Collection | Core i5 |
Zambezi | Codename | Coffee Lake |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 6 |
8 | Threads | 6 |
3.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.9 GHz |
3.9 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.1 GHz |
125 W | TDP | 65 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
18.0x | Multiplier | 29.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |