Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — Core i9-10900F outperforms the more expensive Core i9-7900X on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck! The better performing Core i9-10900F is 1039 days newer than the more expensive Core i9-7900X.
Advantages of Intel Core i9-10900F
- Performs up to 3% better in Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Core i9-7900X - 193 vs 187 FPS
- Up to 39% cheaper than Core i9-7900X - $244.77 vs $400.0
- Up to 41% better value when playing Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Core i9-7900X - $1.27 vs $2.14 per FPS
- Consumes up to 54% less energy than Intel Core i9-7900X - 65 vs 140 Watts
Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Jun 26th, 2017
FPS
187
96.89119170984456%
Value, $/FPS
$2.14/FPS
59.345794392523366%
Price, $
$400
61%
Buy for $400 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 348669 minutes ago
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
193
100%
Value, $/FPS
$1.27/FPS
100%
Price, $
$244.77
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for $244.77 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 348668 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Jun 26th, 2017
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i9-7900X | vs | Intel Core i9-10900F |
---|---|---|
Jun 26th, 2017 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
Core i9 | Collection | Core i9 |
Skylake-E/EP | Codename | Comet Lake |
Intel Socket 2066 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
10 | Cores | 10 |
20 | Threads | 20 |
3.3 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.8 GHz |
4.3 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.2 GHz |
140 W | TDP | 65 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
33.0x | Multiplier | 28.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |