Core i5-9400F vs A8-7650K

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A8-7650K
2015
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
2.02
Core i5-9400F
2019
6 cores / 6 threads, 65 Watt
6.12
+203%

Core i5-9400F outperforms A8-7650K by a whopping 203% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A8-7650K and Core i5-9400F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking18251011
Place by popularitynot in top-10030
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.5217.08
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesAMD A-Series (Desktop)Intel Core i5
Architecture codenameKaveri (2014−2015)Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019)
Release date7 January 2015 (9 years ago)8 January 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$152$182
Current price$49 (0.3x MSRP)$138 (0.8x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

i5-9400F has 3185% better value for money than A8-7650K.

Detailed specifications

A8-7650K and Core i5-9400F basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores4 (Quad-Core)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads46
Base clock speed3.3 GHz2.9 GHz
Boost clock speed3.8 GHz4.1 GHz
L1 cache256 KB64K (per core)
L2 cache4096 KB256K (per core)
L3 cacheno data9 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nm14 nm
Die size245 mm2149 mm2
Maximum core temperature72 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data72 °C
Number of transistors2,411 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierYesNo

Compatibility

Information on A8-7650K and Core i5-9400F compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11
SocketFM2+FCLGA1151
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-7650K and Core i5-9400F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsSSE1-4a, AVX, AES, FMA4, VTIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
FMA+no data
AVX++
FRTC1no data
FreeSync1no data
PowerTune-no data
DualGraphics1no data
TrueAudio+no data
PowerNow+no data
PowerGating+no data
Out-of-band client management+no data
VirusProtect+no data
HSA1no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
TSXno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoringno data+
SIPPno data-
Statusno dataDiscontinued

Security technologies

A8-7650K and Core i5-9400F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
MPXno data+
Identity Protectionno data+
SGXno dataYes with Intel® ME
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-7650K and Core i5-9400F are enumerated here.

AMD-V+no data
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+
IOMMU 2.0+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-7650K and Core i5-9400F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-2133DDR4-2666
Maximum memory sizeno data128 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidthno data41.6 GB/s
ECC memory supportno data-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R7 Graphicsno data
iGPU core count6no data
Number of pipelines384no data
Enduro+no data
Switchable graphics1no data
UVD+no data
VCE+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A8-7650K and Core i5-9400F integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+no data
HDMI+no data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A8-7650K and Core i5-9400F integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan1no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A8-7650K and Core i5-9400F.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes1616

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

A8-7650K 2.02
i5-9400F 6.12
+203%

Core i5-9400F outperforms A8-7650K by 203% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

A8-7650K 3123
i5-9400F 9471
+203%

Core i5-9400F outperforms A8-7650K by 203% in Passmark.

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

A8-7650K 410
i5-9400F 1380
+237%

Core i5-9400F outperforms A8-7650K by 237% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

A8-7650K 1015
i5-9400F 4831
+376%

Core i5-9400F outperforms A8-7650K by 376% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

A8-7650K 2904
i5-9400F 6490
+123%

Core i5-9400F outperforms A8-7650K by 123% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

A8-7650K 9456
i5-9400F 31523
+233%

Core i5-9400F outperforms A8-7650K by 233% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

A8-7650K 14.2
i5-9400F 6.76
+110%

A8-7650K outperforms Core i5-9400F by 110% in wPrime 32.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

A8-7650K 3
i5-9400F 11
+236%

Core i5-9400F outperforms A8-7650K by 236% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

A8-7650K 296
i5-9400F 984
+232%

Core i5-9400F outperforms A8-7650K by 232% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

A8-7650K 84
i5-9400F 173
+106%

Core i5-9400F outperforms A8-7650K by 106% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

A8-7650K 0.96
i5-9400F 1.95
+103%

Core i5-9400F outperforms A8-7650K by 103% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A8-7650K 2
i5-9400F 5.2
+160%

Core i5-9400F outperforms A8-7650K by 160% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A8-7650K 2105
i5-9400F 5794
+175%

Core i5-9400F outperforms A8-7650K by 175% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A8-7650K 23
i5-9400F 64
+182%

Core i5-9400F outperforms A8-7650K by 182% in x264 encoding pass 2.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A8-7650K 108
i5-9400F 234
+117%

Core i5-9400F outperforms A8-7650K by 117% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.02 6.12
Recency 7 January 2015 8 January 2019
Physical cores 4 6
Threads 4 6
Cost $152 $182
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 65 Watt

The Core i5-9400F is our recommended choice as it beats the A8-7650K in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A8-7650K and Core i5-9400F, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD A8-7650K
A8-7650K
Intel Core i5-9400F
Core i5-9400F

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.9 181 vote

Rate A8-7650K on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.9 56105 votes

Rate Core i5-9400F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A8-7650K or Core i5-9400F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.