i5-4400E vs Athlon X4 950
Aggregate performance score
Athlon X4 950 outperforms Core i5-4400E by a moderate 10% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2103 | 2182 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 3.66 | 0.19 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Core i5 |
| Power efficiency | 3.36 | no data |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) | Haswell (2013−2015) |
| Release date | 27 July 2017 (8 years ago) | 1 October 2013 (12 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $60 | $266 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Athlon X4 950 has 1826% better value for money than i5-4400E.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Athlon X4 950 and Core i5-4400E 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 cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 3.5 GHz | 2.7 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 3.3 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 3 MB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 22 nm |
| Die size | 246 mm2 | 130 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 74 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 960 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon X4 950 and Core i5-4400E 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 configuration | 1 | no data |
| Socket | AM4 | FCBGA1364 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 512 KB + 3 MB |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon X4 950 and Core i5-4400E. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | + |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon X4 950 and Core i5-4400E are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon X4 950 and Core i5-4400E. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 Dual-channel | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel HD Graphics 4600 (400 - 1000 MHz) |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.03 | 1.84 |
| Recency | 27 July 2017 | 1 October 2013 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 512 Watt |
Athlon X4 950 has a 10.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, 100% more physical cores, and 687.7% lower power consumption.
i5-4400E, on the other hand, has a 27.3% more advanced lithography process.
The AMD Athlon X4 950 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Core i5-4400E in performance tests.
Note that Athlon X4 950 is a desktop processor while Core i5-4400E is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
