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 i5-4690 review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£25PassMark multi-core score:5592N. of physical cores:4CPU boost clock speed:3.9 GHzCPU socket:LGA1150TDP (Thermal design power):84 W

Intel Core i5-4690 Review: Compare 74 technical specifications and 4 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

Intel Core i5-4690
5.2/10

Overall score

Score
5.2/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 94% of models
Score components

40%

4.5

Technical score

25%

4.5

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

4.5

Sentiment score

â–¼Worse than 94% of processors
6.7

Value for money

Value for money
6.7/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 83% of models
Score components

70%

5.2

Overall score

30%

10

Price

â–¼Worse than 83%
4.5

Technical score

Technical score
4.5/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 72% of models
Score components

60%

4.1

Performance

18%

4.0

Architecture

10%

4.4

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.8

Power & Thermal

4%

7.4

Platform

1%

6.3

Integrated graphics

â–¼Worse than 72%
4.5

Reviews score

Reviews score
4.5/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 82% of models

4.5

Mark 7.2 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.0

Average grade

20%

8.0

Popularity

Grades by review (4)
1 review, its grade estimated from the review text. 3 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 82%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 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 (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • intel-core-i5-4690
intel-core-i5-4690
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.

What reviewers say about the Intel Core i5-4690

Based on 1 · 3

Reviewers mostly feel it's too dated today, saying moving to a newer generation brings a far more worthwhile improvement.
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the Intel Core i5-4690

Based on 30 owners sharing their experience in online comments

53%positive24%mixed23%negative

Owners like its gaming performance and low cost, but age and limited headroom show in newer games and multitasking.

What owners dislike

  • Owners say it hits 100% CPU quickly, so streaming or multitasking while gaming causes lag and stutter.6
  • Aging hardware and outdated platform6
  • Some owners report stuttering and low frame rates in games like PUBG and Warzone, even with high FPS numbers, though they could not pin down the cause.4

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i5-4690

Technical score
Technical score
4.5/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 72% of models
Score components:

60%

4.1

Performance

18%

4.0

Architecture

10%

4.4

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.8

Power & Thermal

4%

7.4

Platform

1%

6.3

Integrated graphics

4.5
Reviews score
4.5
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.7/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 83% of models
Score components:

70%

5.2

Overall score

30%

10

Price

6.7
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
LGA1150
This processor uses the LGA1150 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 55.3% of processors and equal to that of 2.7% of processors.
Chipset
H97, Z97, H87, Q87, B85, Q85, Z87, H81
This processor supports H97, Z97, H87, Q87, B85, Q85, Z87, H81 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 52.5% of processors and equal to that of 2.4% 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, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, BMI1, BMI2
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, BMI1, BMI2 instruction sets, which is broader support than 58.8% of processors and equal to that of 7.6% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
N. of physical cores
4
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 4 CPU cores, which is fewer than 52.8% of processors and equal to 27.5% of processors.
CPU threads
4
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 4 CPU threads, which is fewer than 69% of processors and equal to 25.2% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
3.9 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 3.9 GHz which is lower than that of 67% of processors and equal to that of 3.2% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
4x 3.5 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 4x3.5 GHz which is lower than that of 50.5% of processors and equal to that of 1.5% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
5,592
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 5,592 in PassMark, which is lower than 69.9% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
22 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 22 nm process node, which is older than that of 85% of processors and equal to that of 9.6% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 22 nm
This processor is built on the Intel 22 nm foundry process, which is less advanced than that of 84.9% of processors and equal to that of 9.8% of processors.
L3 cache
6 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 6 MB which is smaller than that of 62.3% of processors and equal to that of 9.4% of processors.
L2 cache
1 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 1 MB which is smaller than that of 68.3% of processors and equal to that of 17% of processors.
L1 cache
256 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 256 KB which is smaller than that of 60.4% of processors and equal to that of 18.1% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR3
This processor supports DDR DDR3, which is older than that of 86.7% of processors and equal to that of 13.3% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
1,600 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 1,600 MHz, which is lower than that of 87.7% of processors and equal to 10.8% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR3-1600 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR3-1600 MHz, which is lower than that of 89.1% of processors and equal to 8.4% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
?
Maximum memory capacity
32 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 32 GB of memory, which is less than 73% of processors and equal to 18.9% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Intel HD Graphics 4,600
Integrated GPU model
Intel HD Graphics 4600
This processor uses the Intel HD Graphics 4600 integrated GPU, which is less advanced than that in 64% of processors and equal to that in 2.9% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
20
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 20 GPU execution units, which is fewer than 51.6% of processors and equal to 4.3% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
350 MHz
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 350 MHz which is higher than that of 42.7% of processors and equal to that of 25.4% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
H.264 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode), VC-1 (HW decode)
This processor supports H.264 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode), VC-1 (HW decode) media codecs, which is narrower support than 56.5% of processors and equal to 1.2% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
84 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 84 W which is higher than that of 86% of processors and equal to that of 0.7% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
84 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 84 W which is higher than that of 86.1% of processors and equal to that of 0.7% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
?
Tau (power duration limit)
8 seconds
Market range: <8 seconds – >28 seconds
This processor has a turbo duration of 8 seconds which is longer than that of 90.1% of processors and equal to that of 6.9% of processors.
Configurable TDP
no
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 53.7% of processors offer this.
Show more

Intel Core i5-4690 vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • Includes a cooler
    This processor includes a cooler, while the average processor does not. 26.9% of processors include a cooler.
  • 10x cheaper
    Intel Core i5-4690 is cheaper than the average processor (£25 vs £250).
    £25 vs £250
  • Supports heterogeneous scheduling
    This processor uses heterogeneous multi-processing, while the average processor does not. 24.8% of processors use it.
  • 10x cheaper
    Intel Core i5-4690 is cheaper than the average processor (£25 vs £250).
    £25 vs £250
  • Supports heterogeneous scheduling
    This processor uses heterogeneous multi-processing, while the average processor does not. 24.8% of processors use it.
  • Includes a cooler
    This processor includes a cooler, while the average processor does not. 26.9% of processors include a cooler.
  • 32.8% lower review score
    Reviews score
    4.5/ 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
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 82% of models

    4.5

    Mark 7.2 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.0

    Average grade

    20%

    8.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (4)
    1 review, its grade estimated from the review text. 3 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    4.5 vs 6.7
  • 51.2% lower PassMark score
    This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (5,592 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    5,592 vs 11,469
  • 83.3% larger process node
    This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (22 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    22 nm vs 12 nm
  • 2 fewer CPU cores
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (4 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    4 vs 6
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 11.4% lower boost clock
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (3.9 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    3.9 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • 35.8% lower multi-core score
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (3,343 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    3,343 vs 5,209
  • 32.8% lower review score
    Reviews score
    4.5/ 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
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 82% of models

    4.5

    Mark 7.2 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.0

    Average grade

    20%

    8.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (4)
    1 review, its grade estimated from the review text. 3 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    4.5 vs 6.7
  • 37.5% lower sentiment score
    4.5 vs 7.2
  • 9.3% worse value for money
    Intel Core i5-4690 has worse value for money than the average processor (6.66 vs 7.3).
    6.66 vs 7.29
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • 6 years older release date
    This processor has an older release date than the average processor (2014 vs 2020).
    May 2014
    2014 vs 2020
  • More limited crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more limited crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES vs AES, SHA).
    AES vs AES, SHA
  • Older TPM support
    This processor supports an older TPM version than the average processor (TPM 1.2 vs PTT 2).
    TPM 1.2 vs PTT 2.0
  • 51.2% lower PassMark score
    This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (5,592 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    5,592 vs 11,469
  • 2 fewer CPU cores
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (4 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    4 vs 6
  • 11.4% lower boost clock
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (3.9 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    3.9 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 35.8% lower multi-core score
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (3,343 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    3,343 vs 5,209
  • 4 fewer CPU threads
    This processor has fewer CPU threads than the average processor (4 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    4 vs 8
  • 21.2% lower single-core score
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,209 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,209 vs 1,535
  • No simultaneous multithreading
    This processor does not support simultaneous multithreading, while the average processor does. 73.8% of processors support it.
  • 14.4% weaker single-core performance
    This processor has a lower PassMark single-core score than the average processor (2,190 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    2,190 vs 2,558
  • 37.5% lower bus transfer rate
    This processor has a lower bus transfer rate than the average processor (5 GT/s vs 8 GT/s). The average processor offers bus transfer rate of 8 GT/s.
    5 GT/s vs 8 GT/s
  • 83.3% larger process node
    This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (22 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    22 nm vs 12 nm
  • 66.7% smaller L2 cache
    This processor has a lower L2 cache than the average processor (1 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    1 MB vs 3 MB
  • 50% less L2 per core
    This processor has less L2 cache per core than the average processor (0.3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    0.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • Less advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a less advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Haswell vs Kaby Lake).
    Haswell vs Kaby Lake
  • 18.9% less L3 per core
    This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.5 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    1.5 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 33.3% smaller L1 cache
    This processor has a lower L1 cache than the average processor (256 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    256 KB vs 384 KB
  • 71.7% fewer transistors
    This processor has fewer transistors than the average processor (1.4 billion vs 4.95 billion). The average processor has 4.95 billion transistors.
    1.4 billion vs 4.95 billion
  • 33.3% smaller L3 cache
    This processor has a lower L3 cache than the average processor (6 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    6 MB vs 9 MB
  • Less advanced foundry
    This processor uses a less advanced foundry process than the average processor (Intel 22 nm vs Intel 14 nm).
    Intel 22 nm vs Intel 14 nm
  • 50% lower memory speed
    This processor has a lower maximum memory speed than the average processor (1,600 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    1,600 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • 45.4% lower memory bandwidth
    This processor has a lower memory bandwidth than the average processor (25.6 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    25.6 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • Older DDR support
    This processor supports an older DDR generation than the average processor (DDR3 vs DDR4).
    DDR3 vs DDR4
  • Lower JEDEC memory speed
    This processor has a lower JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (DDR3-1600 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    DDR3-1,600 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • 50% less memory capacity
    This processor has fewer maximum memory capacity than the average processor (32 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    32 GB vs 64 GB
  • 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
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (H.264 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode), VC-1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    H.264 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode), VC-1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 86.7% higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (84 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    84 W vs 45 W
  • 86.7% higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (84 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    84 W vs 45 W
  • 20 seconds shorter turbo duration
    This processor has a lower turbo duration limit than the average processor (8 seconds vs 28 seconds). The average processor maintains turbo for 28 seconds.
    8 seconds vs 28 seconds

Video reviews

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

5.0
Zenchillis Hardware Reviews
≈ estimated
24/05/2014
Short review · benchmark overview and verdict
Verdict
Intel Core i5-4690 offers only a marginal gain over its predecessor, so it is not worth upgrading an existing system.
7.0
PC Games Hardware
≈ estimated
11/05/2014
Hands-on comparison · Haswell refresh CPU tests
Verdict
Intel Core i5-4690 is only a small upgrade: worth it for newcomers at the same price, but not for existing Core owners.

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

7.0
hardware.info
≈ estimated
11/05/2014
Benchmark review · Haswell refresh
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-4690 is a Haswell refresh, slightly faster than the i5-4670 thanks to a 100MHz clock bump on the same chip.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Core i5-4690

  • Reliable and stable performance for gaming and office work
  • High value for money, especially for mid-range PC builds
  • Effective integrated Intel HD 4600 graphics for basic tasks
  • Excellent single-core speeds and multi-core stability compared to older rivals
  • Runs relatively cool even with a stock cooler under normal usage
  • Smooth performance in older esports titles like CS:GO and League of Legends

What customers don't like about Intel Core i5-4690

  • Locked multiplier prevents easy overclocking (unlike the 'K' variant)
  • Significant performance bottlenecks when paired with modern high-end GPUs
  • Lacks hyper-threading, featuring only 4 cores and 4 threads
  • Struggles with modern AAA titles, leading to stuttering in games like The Witcher 3
  • Aging architecture lacks support for DDR4 RAM and NVMe SSDs
  • High power consumption (84W TDP) compared to modern entry-level chips

Verdict

The Intel Core i5-4690 is a 4th-generation 'Haswell' quad-core desktop processor featuring 4 cores and 4 threads, built on a 22nm process with a 3.5 GHz base frequency and a max turbo speed of 3.9 GHz. It includes 6 MB of Intel Smart Cache, an 84W TDP, and integrated Intel HD Graphics 4600 that supports up to three displays. Key pros include reliable single-core performance for its era, support for up to 32 GB of DDR3-1600 memory, and efficient power management for cooler operation. However, its main cons are a lack of hyper-threading, an inability to be overclocked due to a locked multiplier, and its reliance on the aging LGA 1150 socket and DDR3 memory standard.

Compare Intel Core i5-4690 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 i5-4690 and other processors

No results found