i5-9400F vs Ryzen 7 3700X

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 7 3700X
2019
8 cores / 16 threads, 65 Watt
14.19
+138%
Core i5-9400F
2019
6 cores / 6 threads, 65 Watt
5.96

Ryzen 7 3700X outperforms Core i5-9400F by a whopping 138% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 7 3700X and Core i5-9400F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking5081094
Place by popularity7325
Cost-effectiveness evaluation18.469.07
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesAMD Ryzen 7Intel Core i5
Power efficiency20.668.68
Architecture codenameMatisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019)
Release date7 July 2019 (5 years ago)8 January 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$329$182

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 7 3700X has 104% better value for money than i5-9400F.

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 7 3700X 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads166
Base clock speed3.6 GHz2.9 GHz
Boost clock speed4.4 GHz4.1 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 3.0
Bus rateno data4 × 8 GT/s
Multiplierno data29
L1 cache96K (per core)64K (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)256K (per core)
L3 cache32 MB9 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm, 12 nm14 nm
Die sizeno data149 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data72 °C
Number of transistors19,200 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 7 3700X 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketAM4FCLGA1151
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 7 3700X and Core i5-9400F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Precision Boost 2+no data

Security technologies

Ryzen 7 3700X and Core i5-9400F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
MPX-+
Identity Protection-+
SGXno dataYes with Intel® ME
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 7 3700X and Core i5-9400F are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 7 3700X and Core i5-9400F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Dual-channelDDR4-2666
Maximum memory size128 GB128 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth51.196 GB/s42.671 GB/s

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 7 3700X 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.

Ryzen 7 3700X 14.19
+138%
i5-9400F 5.96

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.

Ryzen 7 3700X 22537
+138%
i5-9400F 9470

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.

Ryzen 7 3700X 1671
+19.1%
i5-9400F 1403

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.

Ryzen 7 3700X 8079
+65%
i5-9400F 4897

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.

Ryzen 7 3700X 5839
i5-9400F 6490
+11.1%

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.

Ryzen 7 3700X 40439
+28.3%
i5-9400F 31523

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.

Ryzen 7 3700X 3.71
+82.2%
i5-9400F 6.76

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.

Ryzen 7 3700X 23
+106%
i5-9400F 11

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Ryzen 7 3700X 2092
+113%
i5-9400F 984

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.

Ryzen 7 3700X 204
+17.9%
i5-9400F 173

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.

Ryzen 7 3700X 2.3
+17.9%
i5-9400F 1.95

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.

Ryzen 7 3700X 11.4
+119%
i5-9400F 5.2

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.  

Ryzen 7 3700X 115
+79.7%
i5-9400F 64

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.  

Ryzen 7 3700X 270
+15.2%
i5-9400F 234

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.

Ryzen 7 3700X 7503
+29.5%
i5-9400F 5794

Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core

Ryzen 7 3700X 8960
+56.8%
i5-9400F 5715

Blender(-)

Ryzen 7 3700X 181
i5-9400F 469
+158%

Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core

Ryzen 7 3700X 1304
+14.5%
i5-9400F 1139

7-Zip Single

Ryzen 7 3700X 5333
+14%
i5-9400F 4678

7-Zip

Ryzen 7 3700X 57307
+124%
i5-9400F 25639

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.19 5.96
Recency 7 July 2019 8 January 2019
Physical cores 8 6
Threads 16 6
Chip lithography 7 nm 14 nm

Ryzen 7 3700X has a 138.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 months, 33.3% more physical cores and 166.7% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Ryzen 7 3700X is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i5-9400F in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 7 3700X 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 Ryzen 7 3700X
Ryzen 7 3700X
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.


4.4 5337 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 3700X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.9 56646 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 Ryzen 7 3700X or Core i5-9400F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.