Core i5-9400F vs Ryzen 5 2600

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

Ryzen 5 2600
2018
6 cores / 12 threads
8.54
+39.3%
Core i5-9400F
2019
6 cores / 6 threads
6.13

Ryzen 5 2600 outperforms Core i5-9400F by 39% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

General info

Comparing Ryzen 5 2600 and Core i5-9400F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking806987
Place by popularity2630
Value for money19.8020.70
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesAMD Ryzen 5Intel Core i5
Architecture codenamePinnacle Riege (Zen+)Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019)
Release date19 April 2018 (6 years old)8 January 2019 (5 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)$199$182
Current price$156 (0.8x MSRP)$122 (0.7x MSRP)

Value for money

Performance per price, higher is better.

i5-9400F has 5% better value for money than Ryzen 5 2600.

Technical specs

Ryzen 5 2600 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 cores6 (Hexa-Core)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads126
Base clock speed3.4 GHz2.9 GHz
Boost clock speed3.9 GHz4.1 GHz
L1 cache96K (per core)64K (per core)
L2 cache3 MB256K (per core)
L3 cache16 MB (shared)9 MB (shared)
Chip lithography12 nm14 nm
Die size192 mm2149 mm2
Maximum core temperature95 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data72 °C
Number of transistors4,800 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplierYesNo

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 5 2600 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketAM4FCLGA1151
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 5 2600 and Core i5-9400F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsDDR4-2933 RAM, PCIe 3, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SMEIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
FMA+no data
AVX++
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

Ryzen 5 2600 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 Ryzen 5 2600 and Core i5-9400F are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 5 2600 and Core i5-9400F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR4-2666
Maximum memory size128 GB128 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth46.933 GB/s41.6 GB/s
ECC memory support+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 5 2600 and Core i5-9400F.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes2016

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.

Ryzen 5 2600 8.54
+39.3%
i5-9400F 6.13

Ryzen 5 2600 outperforms Core i5-9400F by 39% 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%

Ryzen 5 2600 13201
+39.4%
i5-9400F 9472

Ryzen 5 2600 outperforms Core i5-9400F by 39% 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%

Ryzen 5 2600 1152
i5-9400F 1380
+19.8%

Core i5-9400F outperforms Ryzen 5 2600 by 20% 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%

Ryzen 5 2600 4846
+0.4%
i5-9400F 4829

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%

Ryzen 5 2600 4726
i5-9400F 6490
+37.3%

Core i5-9400F outperforms Ryzen 5 2600 by 37% 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%

Ryzen 5 2600 28173
i5-9400F 31523
+11.9%

Core i5-9400F outperforms Ryzen 5 2600 by 12% 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%

Ryzen 5 2600 5.5
+22.9%
i5-9400F 6.76

Core i5-9400F outperforms Ryzen 5 2600 by 23% 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%

Ryzen 5 2600 14
+21.7%
i5-9400F 11

Ryzen 5 2600 outperforms Core i5-9400F by 22% 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%

Ryzen 5 2600 1248
+26.8%
i5-9400F 984

Ryzen 5 2600 outperforms Core i5-9400F by 27% 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%

Ryzen 5 2600 157
i5-9400F 173
+10%

Core i5-9400F outperforms Ryzen 5 2600 by 10% 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%

Ryzen 5 2600 1.76
i5-9400F 1.95
+10.8%

Core i5-9400F outperforms Ryzen 5 2600 by 11% 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%

Ryzen 5 2600 7.5
+44.2%
i5-9400F 5.2

Ryzen 5 2600 outperforms Core i5-9400F by 44% 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%

Ryzen 5 2600 4517
i5-9400F 5794
+28.3%

Core i5-9400F outperforms Ryzen 5 2600 by 28% in WinRAR 4.0.

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%

Ryzen 5 2600 205
i5-9400F 234
+14%

Core i5-9400F outperforms Ryzen 5 2600 by 14% in x264 encoding pass 1.

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%

Ryzen 5 2600 75
+17.2%
i5-9400F 64

Ryzen 5 2600 outperforms Core i5-9400F by 17% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Gaming performance

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 8.54 6.13
Recency 19 April 2018 8 January 2019
Threads 12 6
Cost $199 $182
Chip lithography 12 nm 14 nm

The Ryzen 5 2600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i5-9400F in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 5 2600 and Core i5-9400F, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote

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


AMD Ryzen 5 2600
Ryzen 5 2600
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.

User Ratings

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


3.3 13944 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 2600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.9 55928 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 5 2600 or Core i5-9400F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.