i9-9820X vs i5-2400
Aggregate performance score
Core i9-9820X outperforms Core i5-2400 by a whopping 423% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core i5-2400 and Core i9-9820X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1756 | 597 |
| Place by popularity | 39 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.86 | 4.78 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | Core i5 (Desktop) | Intel Core i9 |
| Power efficiency | 2.42 | 7.30 |
| Architecture codename | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) | Skylake (server) (2017−2019) |
| Release date | 9 January 2011 (13 years ago) | 8 October 2018 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $60 | $898 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
i9-9820X has 456% better value for money than i5-2400.
Detailed specifications
Core i5-2400 and Core i9-9820X 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) | 10 (Deca-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 20 |
| Base clock speed | 3.1 GHz | 3.3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.4 GHz | 4.2 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 3.0 |
| Bus rate | 5 GT/s | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 33 |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 640 KB |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 10 MB |
| L3 cache | 6144 KB (shared) | 16.5 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 216 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 73 °C | 92 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 72 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1,160 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Core i5-2400 and Core i9-9820X 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 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | LGA1155 | FCLGA2066 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 165 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i5-2400 and Core i9-9820X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | + |
| TSX | - | + |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Flex Memory Access | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | + |
| FDI | + | no data |
| Fast Memory Access | + | no data |
Security technologies
Core i5-2400 and Core i9-9820X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
| EDB | + | + |
| Identity Protection | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i5-2400 and Core i9-9820X are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i5-2400 and Core i9-9820X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4-2666 |
| Maximum memory size | 32 GB | 128 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 4 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 21 GB/s | 85.33 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel HD Graphics 2000 | N/A |
| Quick Sync Video | + | - |
| Clear Video HD | + | no data |
| Graphics max frequency | 1.1 GHz | no data |
| InTru 3D | + | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Core i5-2400 and Core i9-9820X integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 2 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i5-2400 and Core i9-9820X.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 44 |
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.
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
| Performance score | 2.43 | 12.72 |
| Recency | 9 January 2011 | 8 October 2018 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 10 |
| Threads | 4 | 20 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 165 Watt |
i5-2400 has 73.7% lower power consumption.
i9-9820X, on the other hand, has a 423.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, 150% more physical cores and 400% more threads, and a 128.6% more advanced lithography process.
The Core i9-9820X is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i5-2400 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i5-2400 and Core i9-9820X, 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.
