Key Differences
In short — Core i5-10400F outperforms the cheaper Celeron G4900 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Celeron G4900 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i5-10400F is 758 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G4900.
Advantages of Intel Celeron G4900
- Up to 56% cheaper than Core i5-10400F - $50.0 vs $112.53
- Up to 51% better value when playing Elden Ring than Core i5-10400F - $0.45 vs $0.92 per FPS
- Consumes up to 17% less energy than Intel Core i5-10400F - 54 vs 65 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i5-10400F doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Core i5-10400F
- Performs up to 9% better in Elden Ring than Celeron G4900 - 122 vs 112 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G4900 - 12 vs 2 threads
Elden Ring
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Maximum
Desktop • Apr 3rd, 2018
FPS
112
91.80327868852459%
Value, $/FPS
$0.45/FPS
100%
Price, $
$50
100%
Value Winner
Buy for $50 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 349037 minutes ago
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
122
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.92/FPS
48.91304347826087%
Price, $
$112.53
44%
FPS Winner
Buy for $112.53 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 349038 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Maximum
Desktop • Apr 3rd, 2018
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • Apr 3rd, 2018
Single-Core
616
42.83727399165508%
Multi-Core
1051
18.275082594331423%
Intel Celeron G4900 | vs | Intel Core i5-10400F |
---|---|---|
Apr 3rd, 2018 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
Celeron | Collection | Core i5 |
Coffee Lake | Codename | Comet Lake |
Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 6 |
2 | Threads | 12 |
3.1 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.9 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.3 GHz |
54 W | TDP | 65 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
31.0x | Multiplier | 29.0x |
UHD Graphics 610 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |