Question Intel core i5 9400f or AMD equivalent CPU?

[Spiderbait375]

Should I get the Intel core i5 9400f or AMD equivalent CPU in pricing and performance of the 9400f for gaming?

Also which one is better for future proofing?

 

[clutchc]

Knowing Intel's constant need to change sockets, the Ryzen would be more "future proof". At least for now. Plus you can get a 6C/12T CPU in the same price range of the Intel 6C/6T. And no, Im not an AMD fanboy. I'm on a i5-9600K now.

On the other hand, the Intel processor would be slightly faster in most games. But I doubt the difference would be noticeable. Especially if you OC the Ryzen (which you can't do with the i5-9400f)

 

[NightHawkRMX]

Ryzen 5 2600x and 9400f are nearly identical in gaming. When paired with ram around 3200mhz. They trade blows back and fourth depending on game. With most GPUs you wont notice any difference in any title.

The AMD Ryzen 2600x may be more future proof than the I5. Newer games such as Apex legends and Bf5 are utilizing a lot of threads. The I5 has 6 threads but the Ryzen 5 2600x has 12.
Amds am4 platform is being supported untill 2020, which may be longer or shorter than how long 9th gen is supported. I'd guess am4 is more future proof judging by rumors of new 7nm cpus being released to it in a month or so.

 

[R_1]

the 9400f will be better at gaming, intel still holds a slight lead on AMD, the difference to consider would be core count. the intel has 6, the 1700 has 8 cores/16 threads and that will be relevant longer than 6 cores/6 threads.
gaming: intel
future-proofing in as much as anything is: AMD

used the 1700 as it is the same price on PCPP and the performance difference is minimal 4-8% depending on workload.
for heavily threaded workloads the 1700 kills the 9400f

 

[DMAN999]

I would get a Ryzen 5 2600 (currently $150) or a 2600x ($175) or a 2700 ($219) before I spent $230 on the older 1700.

You should read this:

Intel Core i5-9400F vs. AMD Ryzen 5 2600X

Intel's been having some trouble competing with the wave of Ryzen processors, forcing the chip maker to be a little more creative. Today we have the Intel...

www.techspot.com

 

[NightHawkRMX]

That link shows a many game average.
That shows the i5 9400f with fast ram gets a 155 average and the r5 2600x with an overclock and fast ram gets 152 average. The lows are identical.
You arent going to notice any difference since the difference is only 3fps. In some games AMD wins, in others (most) intel wins. No games are a runaway.
This confirms what i said, neither cpu is better now, but i still think the r5 is more future proof.

 

[DMAN999]

^ Exactly, that's why I posted that link. 😁

 

[NightHawkRMX]

4 core 4 thread i5s back in the day were very close to 4 core hyperthreaded thread i7.
Now the same i5 in modern times perform far behind the hyperthreaded i7.
I think in the future the smt on the r5 will help out a lot.

 

[mdd1963]

given my choice, I'd prefer SMT/hyperthreading as well, but, the 9700K is certainly no gaming slouch despite lacking HT....

Even 6c/6t is now (or should be) entry level for newly built gaming rigs...

 

[DMAN999]

The OP was looking at the 9400F though not the 9700K which is a Big difference in performance and price.

The 9700K is undeniably a GREAT gaming CPU but personally I don't feel that an extra 3-10 fps is worth the $100+ price difference.
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/ryzen-7-vs-core-i7-9700k,38046.html

I currently have a Ryzen 5 2600 running at 3.95 and I'm hoping that by the end of summer the 2700X will drop enough in price that it will be worth it for me to sell my 2600 and upgrade to the 2700x.

 

[NightHawkRMX]

Just buy an R7 2700 for much less than the 2700x. It still turbos to 4.1ghz and with a better cooler can overclock to the same point as a 2700x.

 

[DMAN999]

^ That is definitely an option.
I am happy with my OC'd 2600 for now so sometime this fall I will be checking the prices on the 2700 and 2700x and get whichever is a better deal.