OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

Intel Core i5-14400 review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£210PassMark multi-core score:25179N. of physical cores:10CPU boost clock speed:4.7 GHzCPU socket:LGA1700TDP (Thermal design power):65 W

Intel Core i5-14400 Review: Compare 74 technical specifications, 3 expert reviews and 2 best-of lists to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

Intel Core i5-14400
7.6/10

Overall score

Score
7.6/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 83% of models
Score components

40%

7.8

Technical score

25%

7.2

Reviews score

25%

8.1

List score

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.0, the mark of a weaker model in this category

▲Better than 83% of processors
8.2

Value for money

Value for money
8.2/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 93% of models
Score components

70%

7.6

Overall score

30%

9.4

Price

★Better than 93%
7.8

Technical score

Technical score
7.8/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 82% of models
Score components

60%

7.8

Performance

18%

7.4

Architecture

10%

8.7

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.2

Power & Thermal

4%

8.8

Platform

1%

7.7

Integrated graphics

▲Better than 82%
7.2

Reviews score

Reviews score
7.2/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 59% of models

80%

7.1

Average grade

20%

7.4

Popularity

Grades by review (3)
3 reviews: 3 with a printed score, 0 estimated from the review. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
▼Worse than 59%
8.1

List score

List score
8.1/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (2)
List score: in 2 of 83 lists (2%)
★Better than 94%
  • intel-core-i5-14400
  • intel-core-i5-14400
  • intel-core-i5-14400
  • intel-core-i5-14400
  • intel-core-i5-14400
  • intel-core-i5-14400
  • intel-core-i5-14400
intel-core-i5-14400
intel-core-i5-14400
intel-core-i5-14400
intel-core-i5-14400
intel-core-i5-14400
intel-core-i5-14400
intel-core-i5-14400
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i5-14400

Technical score
Technical score
7.8/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 82% of models
Score components:

60%

7.8

Performance

18%

7.4

Architecture

10%

8.7

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.2

Power & Thermal

4%

8.8

Platform

1%

7.7

Integrated graphics

7.8
Reviews score
7.2
List score
8.1
Value for money
Value for money
8.2/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 93% of models
Score components:

70%

7.6

Overall score

30%

9.4

Price

8.2
Processor type
desktop
This processor belongs to the desktop processor class, which is more advanced than that of 54.7% of processors and equal to that of 39.5% of processors.
CPU socket
LGA1700
This processor uses the LGA1700 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 84.5% of processors and equal to that of 8.4% of processors.
Chipset
Intel 600 Series, Intel 700 Series
This processor supports Intel 600 Series, Intel 700 Series chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 81.6% of processors and equal to that of 1.5% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, FMA3, AES, SHA, BMI1, BMI2
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, FMA3, AES, SHA, BMI1, BMI2 instruction sets, which is broader support than 51.9% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
10
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 10 CPU cores, which is more than 75.2% of processors and equal to 4.6% of processors.
CPU threads
16
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 16 CPU threads, which is more than 69% of processors and equal to 14.6% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.7 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.7 GHz which is higher than that of 64.8% of processors and equal to that of 4% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
6x 2.5 GHz & 4x 1.8 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 6x2.5 GHz & 4x1.8 GHz which is higher than that of 69.7% of processors and equal to that of 0.4% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
25,179
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 25,179 in PassMark, which is higher than 79.8% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
10 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 10 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 50.8% of processors and equal to that of 19.5% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 7
This processor is built on the Intel 7 foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 64.8% of processors and equal to that of 15.7% of processors.
L3 cache
20 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 20 MB which is larger than that of 78.1% of processors and equal to that of 1.7% of processors.
L2 cache
9.5 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 9.5 MB which is larger than that of 77.2% of processors and equal to that of 1.7% of processors.
L1 cache
?
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4/DDR5
This processor supports DDR DDR4/DDR5, which is newer than that of 77.1% of processors and equal to that of 10.7% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
4,800 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 4,800 MHz, which is higher than that of 64.6% of processors and equal to 6% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR5-4800 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR5-4800 MHz, which is higher than that of 62.3% of processors and equal to 6.7% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
?
Maximum memory capacity
192 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 192 GB of memory, which is more than 82.2% of processors and equal to 6.8% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
Intel UHD Graphics 730
This processor uses the Intel UHD Graphics 730 integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 54.4% of processors and equal to that in 2.1% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
24
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 24 GPU execution units, which is more than 49.1% of processors and equal to 20.8% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
300 MHz
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 300 MHz which is lower than that of 57.8% of processors and equal to that of 38.4% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)
This processor supports H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode) media codecs, which is broader support than 85.4% of processors and equal to 5.4% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
65 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 65 W which is higher than that of 68% of processors and equal to that of 17% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
65 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 65 W which is higher than that of 68.1% of processors and equal to that of 17.4% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
148 W
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 148 W which is higher than that of 80.9% of processors and equal to that of 0.8% of processors.
Tau (power duration limit)
28 seconds
Market range: <8 seconds – >28 seconds
This processor has a turbo duration of 28 seconds which is longer than that of 4.4% of processors and equal to that of 85.3% of processors.
Configurable TDP
no
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 53.7% of processors offer this.
Show more

Intel Core i5-14400 vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 2.2x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (25,179 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    25,179 vs 11,469
  • 2.03x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (10,574 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    10,574 vs 5,209
  • 46.3% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,743 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,743 vs 2,558
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (5 + 4 vs 3).
    5.0 + 4.0 vs 3.0
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Raptor Lake Refresh vs Kaby Lake).
    Raptor Lake Refresh vs Kaby Lake
  • 8 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (16 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    16 vs 8
  • 4 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (10 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    10 vs 6
  • 51.1% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,319 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,319 vs 1,535
  • 12.1% better value for money
    Intel Core i5-14400 has better value for money than the average processor (8.16 vs 7.3).
    8.16 vs 7.29
  • 7.5% higher review score
    Reviews score
    7.2/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▼ Worse than 59% of models

    80%

    7.1

    Average grade

    20%

    7.4

    Popularity

    Grades by review (3)
    3 reviews: 3 with a printed score, 0 estimated from the review. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    7.2 vs 6.7
  • Modern CPU socket
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA1700 vs FP5).
    LGA1700 vs FP5
  • 4 years newer release date
    This processor has a newer release date than the average processor (2024 vs 2020).
    January 2024
    2024 vs 2020
  • More extensive crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more extensive crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES, SHA, RSA/PKA vs AES, SHA).
    AES, SHA, RSA/PKA vs AES, SHA
  • Supports heterogeneous scheduling
    This processor uses heterogeneous multi-processing, while the average processor does not. 24.8% of processors use it.
  • 2.2x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (25,179 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    25,179 vs 11,469
  • 2.03x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (10,574 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    10,574 vs 5,209
  • 46.3% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,743 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,743 vs 2,558
  • 8 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (16 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    16 vs 8
  • 4 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (10 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    10 vs 6
  • 51.1% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,319 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,319 vs 1,535
  • 6.8% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (4.7 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4.7 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (6x2.5 GHz & 4x1.8 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    6x2.5 GHz & 4x1.8 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 2x higher bus transfer rate
    This processor has a higher bus transfer rate than the average processor (16 GT/s vs 8 GT/s). The average processor offers bus transfer rate of 8 GT/s.
    16 GT/s vs 8 GT/s
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Raptor Lake Refresh vs Kaby Lake).
    Raptor Lake Refresh vs Kaby Lake
  • 2.5x more L2 per core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (1.3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    1.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 3.17x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (9.5 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    9.5 MB vs 3 MB
  • Mixed big and small cores
    This processor uses a big.LITTLE design, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors use one.
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (Intel 7 vs Intel 14 nm).
    Intel 7 vs Intel 14 nm
  • 2.22x larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (20 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    20 MB vs 9 MB
  • 8.1% more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (5 + 4 vs 3).
    5.0 + 4.0 vs 3.0
  • 3x more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (192 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    192 GB vs 64 GB
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR4/DDR5 vs DDR4).
    DDR4/DDR5 vs DDR4
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 4 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (20 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    20 vs 16
  • 63.8% higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (76.8 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    76.8 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • Supports ECC memory
    This processor supports ECC memory, while the average processor does not. 32% of processors support it.
  • 50% higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (4,800 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    4,800 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • 1 more supported displays
    This processor has more supported displays than the average processor (4 vs 3). The average processor supports 3 displays.
    4 vs 3
  • Includes a cooler
    This processor includes a cooler, while the average processor does not. 26.9% of processors include a cooler.
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 2.31x higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (148 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    148 W vs 64 W
  • 44.4% higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    65 W vs 45 W
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • 21.5% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (215 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    215 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 44.4% higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    65 W vs 45 W
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, FMA3, AES, SHA, BMI1, BMI2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, FMA3, AES, SHA, BMI1, BMI2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, FMA3, AES, SHA, BMI1, BMI2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, FMA3, AES, SHA, BMI1, BMI2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 21.5% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (215 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    215 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 2.31x higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (148 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    148 W vs 64 W
  • 44.4% higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    65 W vs 45 W
  • 44.4% higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    65 W vs 45 W

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

Not graded
Overview video
Overview video
Not graded
Not graded
Overview video

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

6.0
tomshardware.com
✓ explicit
18/04/2024
Lab test · Gaming and productivity
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-14400 is a lackluster refresh of the Core i5-13400, and AMD's Ryzen chips are the better pick for builders.
6.0
uk.pcmag.com
✓ explicit
22/05/2026
Lab test · Budget chip
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-14400 is a budget chip for everyday tasks and casual games, but it trails newer rivals such as the Core Ultra 5 225.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Core i5-14400

  • Efficient performance for 1080p and 1440p gaming
  • Low power consumption (65W base) and runs cool with standard cooling
  • Offers a good balance for productivity tasks like video editing and multitasking
  • Compatible with existing LGA 1700 motherboards, making it a viable upgrade for 12th-gen users
  • Includes a competent stock cooler that remains relatively quiet under load
  • Support for both DDR4 and DDR5 memory gives builders more budget flexibility

What customers don't like about Intel Core i5-14400

  • Minimal performance gains over its predecessor, the i5-13400 (essentially a minor refresh)
  • Faces strong competition from AMD's Ryzen 5 7600 and 7600X in the same price bracket
  • Limited upgrade path as the LGA 1700 socket is considered at the end of its life
  • Pricing is often cited as too high compared to faster alternatives like the Ryzen 7 5700X3D for gaming
  • Limited future-proofing due to reliance on older architecture in certain steppings (B0 vs C0 silicon lottery)
  • Confusion regarding Intel 13th/14th gen stability issues, though non-K models like the 14400 are less affected

Verdict

The Intel Core i5-14400 is a 14th-generation Raptor Lake Refresh desktop processor featuring a hybrid architecture with 10 cores (6 Performance-cores and 4 Efficient-cores) and 16 threads. It operates at a base clock of 2.5 GHz for P-cores and 1.8 GHz for E-cores, with a maximum turbo frequency of up to 4.7 GHz and 20 MB of Intel Smart Cache. Key advantages include support for both DDR4 (up to 3200 MT/s) and DDR5 (up to 4800 MT/s) memory, PCIe 5.0 connectivity, integrated Intel UHD Graphics 730, and a modest 65W base power draw that makes it easy to cool. However, it offers only marginal performance gains over the previous-gen i5-13400, features an unlocked multiplier that prevents traditional overclocking, and faces strong value competition from AMD's Ryzen 5 7600X in gaming and productivity benchmarks.

Compare Intel Core i5-14400 with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Intel Core i5-14400 and other processors

No results found