Key Differences
In short — Core i9-10900X outperforms the cheaper Core i3-3240 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Core i3-3240 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i9-10900X is 2602 days newer than the cheaper Core i3-3240.
Advantages of Intel Core i3-3240
- Up to 93% cheaper than Core i9-10900X - $41.0 vs $615.0
- Up to 92% better value when playing Battlefield V than Core i9-10900X - $0.2 vs $2.5 per FPS
- Consumes up to 67% less energy than Intel Core i9-10900X - 55 vs 165 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i9-10900X doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Core i9-10900X
- Performs up to 17% better in Battlefield V than Core i3-3240 - 246 vs 210 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i3-3240 - 20 vs 4 threads
Battlefield V
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Sep 3rd, 2012
FPS
210
85.36585365853658%
Value, $/FPS
$0.2/FPS
100%
Price, $
$41
100%
Value Winner
Buy for $41 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 349700 minutes ago
Buy for $615 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 349701 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Sep 3rd, 2012
Desktop • Oct 19th, 2019
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • Sep 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
554
35.152284263959395%
Multi-Core
1137
12.133176822110766%
Intel Core i3-3240 | vs | Intel Core i9-10900X |
---|---|---|
Sep 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Oct 19th, 2019 |
Core i3 | Collection | Core i9 Extreme |
Ivy Bridge | Codename | Cascade Lake |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | Intel Socket 2066 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 10 |
4 | Threads | 20 |
3.4 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.7 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.5 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 165 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
34.0x | Multiplier | 37.0x |
Intel HD 2500 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |