i9-10880H vs i5-9400F
Aggregate performance score
Core i9-10880H outperforms Core i5-9400F by an impressive 55% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core i5-9400F and Core i9-10880H processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1094 | 827 |
| Place by popularity | 25 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 9.07 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Core i5 | Intel Comet Lake |
| Power efficiency | 8.68 | 19.39 |
| Architecture codename | Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) | Comet Lake-H (2020) |
| Release date | 8 January 2019 (5 years ago) | 2 April 2020 (4 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $182 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Core i5-9400F and Core i9-10880H 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 | 6 (Hexa-Core) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 6 | 16 |
| Base clock speed | 2.9 GHz | 2.3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.1 GHz | 5.1 GHz |
| Bus type | DMI 3.0 | no data |
| Bus rate | 4 × 8 GT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 29 | no data |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | 512 KB |
| L2 cache | 256K (per core) | 2 MB |
| L3 cache | 9 MB (shared) | 16 MB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 149 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 72 °C | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Core i5-9400F and Core i9-10880H 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 (Uniprocessor) | no data |
| Socket | FCLGA1151 | FCBGA1440 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 45 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i5-9400F and Core i9-10880H. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 2.0 | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | + |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
Security technologies
Core i5-9400F and Core i9-10880H 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 | Yes with Intel® ME | no data |
| OS Guard | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i5-9400F and Core i9-10880H are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i5-9400F and Core i9-10880H. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-2666 | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | 128 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 42.671 GB/s | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel UHD Graphics 630 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i5-9400F and Core i9-10880H.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | no data |
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.
Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 5.96 | 9.22 |
| Recency | 8 January 2019 | 2 April 2020 |
| Physical cores | 6 | 8 |
| Threads | 6 | 16 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 45 Watt |
i9-10880H has a 54.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, 33.3% more physical cores and 166.7% more threads, and 44.4% lower power consumption.
The Core i9-10880H is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i5-9400F in performance tests.
Note that Core i5-9400F is a desktop processor while Core i9-10880H is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i5-9400F and Core i9-10880H, 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.
