Core i5-9400F vs FX-9830P

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-9830P
2016
4 cores / 4 threads, 25 Watt
2.14
Core i5-9400F
2019
6 cores / 6 threads, 65 Watt
6.12
+186%

i5-9400F outperforms FX-9830P by a whopping 186% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-9830P and Core i5-9400F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking17881021
Place by popularitynot in top-10029
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data17.62
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesAMD Bristol RidgeIntel Core i5
Architecture codenameBristol Ridge (2016−2019)Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019)
Release date1 June 2016 (8 years ago)8 January 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$182
Current price$749 $127 (0.7x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

FX-9830P 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 GHz2.9 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz4.1 GHz
L1 cacheno data64K (per core)
L2 cache2 MB256K (per core)
L3 cacheno data9 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nm14 nm
Die size250 mm2149 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data72 °C
Number of transistors3100 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on FX-9830P 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 configurationno data1
Socketno dataFCLGA1151
Power consumption (TDP)25-45 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-9830P and Core i5-9400F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsDual-Channel DDR3/DDR4-1866 Memory Controller, PCIe 3.0 x8Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NIno data+
AVXno 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

FX-9830P 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 FX-9830P and Core i5-9400F are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-9830P and Core i5-9400F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR4-2666
Maximum memory sizeno data128 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
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 (Bristol Ridge)no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-9830P and Core i5-9400F.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

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.

FX-9830P 2.14
i5-9400F 6.12
+186%

Core i5-9400F outperforms FX-9830P by 186% based on our aggregate 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%

FX-9830P 3307
i5-9400F 9470
+186%

Core i5-9400F outperforms FX-9830P by 186% 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%

FX-9830P 609
i5-9400F 1382
+127%

Core i5-9400F outperforms FX-9830P by 127% 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%

FX-9830P 1526
i5-9400F 4835
+217%

Core i5-9400F outperforms FX-9830P by 217% 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%

FX-9830P 3033
i5-9400F 6490
+114%

Core i5-9400F outperforms FX-9830P by 114% 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%

FX-9830P 9822
i5-9400F 31523
+221%

Core i5-9400F outperforms FX-9830P by 221% 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%

FX-9830P 10.27
i5-9400F 6.76
+51.9%

FX-9830P outperforms Core i5-9400F by 52% 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%

FX-9830P 4
i5-9400F 11
+210%

Core i5-9400F outperforms FX-9830P by 210% 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%

FX-9830P 301
i5-9400F 984
+227%

Core i5-9400F outperforms FX-9830P by 227% 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%

FX-9830P 93
i5-9400F 173
+86%

Core i5-9400F outperforms FX-9830P by 86% 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%

FX-9830P 1.1
i5-9400F 1.95
+77.3%

Core i5-9400F outperforms FX-9830P by 77% 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%

FX-9830P 2
i5-9400F 5.2
+160%

Core i5-9400F outperforms FX-9830P by 160% in TrueCrypt AES.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.14 6.12
Recency 1 June 2016 8 January 2019
Physical cores 4 6
Threads 4 6
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 65 Watt

The Core i5-9400F is our recommended choice as it beats the FX-9830P in performance tests.

Be aware that FX-9830P is a notebook processor while Core i5-9400F is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-9830P 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 FX-9830P
FX-9830P
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.


3.6 108 votes

Rate FX-9830P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.9 56220 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 FX-9830P or Core i5-9400F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.