i5-9400T vs Athlon 64 X2 4800+
Primary details
Comparing Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4800+ and Core i5-9400T processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 1173 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 9.10 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | 2x Athlon 64 (Desktop) | Intel Core i5 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 14.20 |
| Architecture codename | Windsor (2006−2007) | Coffee Lake (2017−2019) |
| Release date | no data (2024 years ago) | 23 April 2019 (5 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $182 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4800+ and Core i5-9400T 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 6 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 1.8 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 3.4 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 3.0 |
| Bus rate | 1000 MHz | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 18 |
| L1 cache | no data | 384 KB |
| L2 cache | no data | 1.5 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 9 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | no data | 149 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 72 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4800+ and Core i5-9400T 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 | no data | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | no data | FCLGA1151 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4800+ and Core i5-9400T. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
Security technologies
Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4800+ and Core i5-9400T technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| MPX | - | + |
| Identity Protection | - | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® ME |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4800+ and Core i5-9400T are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4800+ and Core i5-9400T. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4-2666 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 128 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 42.671 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel UHD Graphics 630 |
| Max video memory | no data | 64 GB |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Clear Video | no data | + |
| Clear Video HD | no data | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 1.05 GHz |
| InTru 3D | no data | + |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4800+ and Core i5-9400T integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4800+ and Core i5-9400T integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| 4K resolution support | no data | + |
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | no data | 4096 x 2304@24Hz |
| Max resolution over eDP | no data | 4096 x 2304@60Hz |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | no data | 4096 x 2304@60Hz |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4800+ and Core i5-9400T integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | 12 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.5 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4800+ and Core i5-9400T.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 16 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 2 | 6 |
| Threads | 2 | 6 |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 35 Watt |
i5-9400T has 200% more physical cores and 200% more threads, a 542.9% more advanced lithography process, and 85.7% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Athlon 64 X2 4800+ and Core i5-9400T. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 X2 4800+ and Core i5-9400T, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
