OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v1.0
Processors Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are evaluated mathematically under Frontumo Processors Methodology v1.0 using verified laboratory benchmarks, technical specifications, and authentic consumer ratings with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Processors Methodology v1.0

Intel Core i5 9400T Review | 78 Data compared

Avg. price:~£160PassMark benchmark result:8144N. of physical cores:6CPU boost clock speed:3.4 GHzCPU socket:LGA1151TDP (Thermal design power):35 W

Intel Core i5 9400T Review: Compare 78 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

4.4

Overall score

Score
4.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the processor's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best processors on the market.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 78% of models
Score components

90%

4.4

Technical score

10%

?

User score

â–¼Worse than 78% of processors
4.4

Technical score

Technical score
4.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the processor's technical performance, covering key areas such as processing performance, core configuration, efficiency, platform support, integrated features, and thermal behavior.
When it matters
When you want to compare processors based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 73% of models
Score components

60%

3.4

Performance

18%

5.0

Cache & Architecture

10%

5.7

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.4

Power & Thermal

4%

7.9

Platform

1%

6.9

Integrated Graphics

â–¼Worse than 73% of processors
?

User score

User score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 91% of models
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

  • No image
No image

Best prices

*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 9400T

Technical score
Technical score
4.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the processor's technical performance, covering key areas such as processing performance, core configuration, efficiency, platform support, integrated features, and thermal behavior.
When it matters
When you want to compare processors based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 73% of models
Score components:

60%

3.4

Performance

18%

5.0

Cache & Architecture

10%

5.7

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.4

Power & Thermal

4%

7.9

Platform

1%

6.9

Integrated Graphics

4.4
User score
User score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 91% of models
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

?
Popularity
Popularity
1.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you prefer to choose a processor reviewed and selected by many other buyers.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Popularity:
Intel Core i5 9400T has a popularity score of 1 point, which is higher than that of 0% of products in this category.
1.0
Value for money
Value for money
6.0/ 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 76% of models
Score components:

60%

4.4

Overall score

40%

9.7

Price

6.0
Brand name
Intel
Processor type
desktop
Processor type
desktop
â–² Better than 56% of models
This processor belongs to the desktop processor class, which is more advanced than that of 56% of processors and equal to that of 37.9% of processors.
CPU socket
LGA1151
CPU socket
LGA1151
â–² Better than 61% of models
This processor uses the LGA1151 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 60.7% of processors and equal to that of 9.4% of processors.
Chipset
Z390, Z370, Q370, H370, B365, B360, H310
Chipset
Z390, Z370, Q370, H370, B365, B360, H310
â–² Better than 57% of models
This processor supports Z390, Z370, Q370, H370, B365, B360, H310 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 57.2% of processors and equal to that of 4.4% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
CPU architecture
x86-64
â–² Better than 2% of models
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.7% of processors and equal to that of 98.3% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
6
N. of physical cores
6
â–² Better than 50% of models
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 6 CPU cores, which is more than 49.9% of processors and equal to 13.4% of processors.
CPU threads
6
CPU threads
6
â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 6 CPU threads, which is fewer than 64.9% of processors and equal to 2.2% of processors.
Threads per core
1
Threads per core
1
â–¼ Worse than 70% of models
Market range: <0 – >2.5
This processor offers 1 threads per core, which is fewer than 69.8% of processors and equal to 30.2% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
3.4 GHz
CPU boost clock speed
3.4 GHz
â–¼ Worse than 84% of models
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 3.4 GHz which is lower than that of 83.7% of processors and equal to that of 2.9% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
6x 1.8 GHz
CPU base clock speed
6x 1.8 GHz
â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
This processor has a base clock of 6x1.8 GHz which is lower than that of 65.3% of processors and equal to that of 0.2% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
14 nm
Semiconductor size
14 nm
â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 14 nm process node, which is older than that of 50.6% of processors and equal to that of 33.9% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 14 nm
Foundry
Intel 14 nm
â–¼ Worse than 55% of models
This processor is built on the Intel 14 nm foundry process, which is less advanced than that of 55.2% of processors and equal to that of 29.3% of processors.
L3 cache
9 MB
L3 cache
9 MB
â–² Better than 52% of models
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 9 MB which is larger than that of 51.7% of processors and equal to that of 1.9% of processors.
L2 cache
1.5 MB
L2 cache
1.5 MB
â–¼ Worse than 62% of models
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 1.5 MB which is smaller than that of 62.2% of processors and equal to that of 4.6% of processors.
L1 cache
384 KB
L1 cache
384 KB
â–² Better than 45% of models
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 384 KB which is larger than that of 44.9% of processors and equal to that of 15.7% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4
DDR memory version
DDR4
â–¼ Worse than 42% of models
This processor supports DDR DDR4, which is newer than that of 26.3% of processors and equal to that of 31.7% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
2,666 MHz
Maximum memory speed
2,666 MHz
â–¼ Worse than 55% of models
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 2,666 MHz, which is lower than that of 54.7% of processors and equal to 8.1% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR4-2666 MHz
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR4-2666 MHz
â–¼ Worse than 58% of models
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR4-2666 MHz, which is lower than that of 58.3% of processors and equal to 8% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
128 GB
Maximum memory capacity
128 GB
â–² Better than 62% of models
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 128 GB of memory, which is more than 61.9% of processors and equal to 21.4% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
Integrated graphics
yes
â–² Better than 12% of models
This processor includes integrated graphics. 12.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
Integrated GPU model
Intel UHD Graphics 630
Integrated GPU model
Intel UHD Graphics 630
â–¼ Worse than 47% of models
This processor uses the Intel UHD Graphics 630 integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 44.3% of processors and equal to that in 8.3% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
24
Integrated GPU execution units
24
â–² Better than 49% of models
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 24 GPU execution units, which is more than 49.3% of processors and equal to 21.5% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
350 MHz
Integrated GPU base frequency
350 MHz
â–² Better than 42% of models
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 350 MHz which is higher than that of 42.3% of processors and equal to that of 26.1% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
Integrated media encoders/decoders
H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
â–² Better than 72% of models
This processor supports H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode) media codecs, which is broader support than 72.1% of processors and equal to 2.9% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
35 W
TDP (Thermal design power)
35 W
â–² Better than 52% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 35 W which is lower than that of 51.9% of processors and equal to that of 14.8% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
35 W
Base power (PL1)
35 W
â–² Better than 52% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 35 W which is lower than that of 52% of processors and equal to that of 15% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
?
Tau (power duration limit)
28 seconds
Tau (power duration limit)
28 seconds
â–¼ Worse than 10% of models
Market range: <8 seconds – >28 seconds
This processor has a turbo duration of 28 seconds which is longer than that of 3.4% of processors and equal to that of 86.1% of processors.
Configurable TDP
yes
Configurable TDP
yes
â–² Better than 47% of models
This processor supports configurable TDP. 47.3% of processors support configurable TDP.
cTDP: 25 W
Show more

Intel Core i5 9400T vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceCache & ArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated GraphicsPower & Thermal
  • Supports memory overclocking
    Memory overclocking
    yes
    â–² Better than 56% of models
    This processor supports memory overclocking, the average processor does not. 43.6% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 2x more memory capacity
    Maximum memory capacity
    128 GB
    â–² Better than 62% of models
    Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (128 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    128 GB vs 64 GB
  • Advanced security extensions
    Security extensions
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, MPX, OS Guard, Boot Guard
    â–² Better than 57% of models
    This processor provides more advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, MPX, OS Guard, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, MPX, OS Guard, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    Microarchitecture codename
    Coffee Lake Refresh
    â–² Better than 50% of models
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Coffee Lake Refresh vs Kaby Lake).
    Coffee Lake Refresh vs Kaby Lake
  • Modern CPU socket
    CPU socket
    LGA1151
    â–² Better than 61% of models
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA1151 vs FP4).
    LGA1151 vs FP4
  • 15.8% smaller die size
    Die size
    149 mm²
    â–² Better than 62% of models
    Market range: <99 mm² – >257 mm²
    This processor has a lower die size than the average processor (149 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    149 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 22.2% lower base power
    Base power (PL1)
    35 W
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (35 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    35 W vs 45 W
  • Advanced security extensions
    Security extensions
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, MPX, OS Guard, Boot Guard
    â–² Better than 57% of models
    This processor provides more advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, MPX, OS Guard, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, MPX, OS Guard, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor
  • Modern CPU socket
    CPU socket
    LGA1151
    â–² Better than 61% of models
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA1151 vs FP4).
    LGA1151 vs FP4
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    Microarchitecture codename
    Coffee Lake Refresh
    â–² Better than 50% of models
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Coffee Lake Refresh vs Kaby Lake).
    Coffee Lake Refresh vs Kaby Lake
  • 15.8% smaller die size
    Die size
    149 mm²
    â–² Better than 62% of models
    Market range: <99 mm² – >257 mm²
    This processor has a lower die size than the average processor (149 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    149 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • Supports memory overclocking
    Memory overclocking
    yes
    â–² Better than 56% of models
    This processor supports memory overclocking, the average processor does not. 43.6% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 2x more memory capacity
    Maximum memory capacity
    128 GB
    â–² Better than 62% of models
    Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (128 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    128 GB vs 64 GB
  • 22.2% lower base power
    Base power (PL1)
    35 W
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (35 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    35 W vs 45 W
  • 76.1% lower multi-core score
    Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
    1,155
    â–¼ Worse than 81% of models
    Market range: <763 – >14k
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (1,155 vs 4,829). The average processor scores 4,829 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    1,155 vs 4,829
  • 20.9% lower boost clock
    CPU boost clock speed
    3.4 GHz
    â–¼ Worse than 84% of models
    Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (3.4 GHz vs 4.3 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.3 GHz.
    3.4 GHz vs 4.3 GHz
  • 58.6% weaker multi-core performance
    Cinebench R20 multi-core benchmark score
    1,155
    â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
    Market range: <702 – >10.8k
    This processor has a lower multi-core performance than the average processor (1,155 vs 2,791). The average processor scores 2,791 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    1,155 vs 2,791
  • 17.3% weaker single-core performance
    PassMark single-core benchmark score
    2068
    â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
    Market range: <1.4k – >4k
    This processor has a lower PassMark single-core score than the average processor (2068 vs 2,500). The average processor scores 2,500 in PassMark single-core.
    2,068 vs 2,500
  • 21.5% lower single-core score
    Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark score
    1,155
    â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
    Market range: <561 – >2.7k
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,155 vs 1,471). The average processor scores 1,471 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,155 vs 1,471
  • No multithreading support
    Multithreading
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
    This processor does not support multithreading, the average processor does. 74.2% of processors support multithreading.
  • 16.7% larger process node
    Semiconductor size
    14 nm
    â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
    Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
    This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (14 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    14 nm vs 12 nm
  • 50% less L2 per core
    L2 per core
    0.25 MB/core
    â–¼ Worse than 63% of models
    Market range: <0.25 MB/core – >2 MB/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
  • 9.2% worse value for money
    Intel Core i5 9400T has worse value for money than the average processor (6.01 vs 6.6).
    6.01 vs 6.56
  • No crypto acceleration
    Cryptographic acceleration
    AES
    â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
    This processor does not include crypto acceleration, the average processor does. 0.00% of processors include crypto acceleration.
    AES vs AES, SHA
  • Narrower instruction support
    Instruction sets
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES
    â–¼ Worse than 56% of models
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA
  • 76.1% lower multi-core score
    Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
    1,155
    â–¼ Worse than 81% of models
    Market range: <763 – >14k
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (1,155 vs 4,829). The average processor scores 4,829 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    1,155 vs 4,829
  • 20.9% lower boost clock
    CPU boost clock speed
    3.4 GHz
    â–¼ Worse than 84% of models
    Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (3.4 GHz vs 4.3 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.3 GHz.
    3.4 GHz vs 4.3 GHz
  • 58.6% weaker multi-core performance
    Cinebench R20 multi-core benchmark score
    1,155
    â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
    Market range: <702 – >10.8k
    This processor has a lower multi-core performance than the average processor (1,155 vs 2,791). The average processor scores 2,791 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    1,155 vs 2,791
  • 17.3% weaker single-core performance
    PassMark single-core benchmark score
    2068
    â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
    Market range: <1.4k – >4k
    This processor has a lower PassMark single-core score than the average processor (2068 vs 2,500). The average processor scores 2,500 in PassMark single-core.
    2,068 vs 2,500
  • 21.5% lower single-core score
    Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark score
    1,155
    â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
    Market range: <561 – >2.7k
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,155 vs 1,471). The average processor scores 1,471 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,155 vs 1,471
  • No multithreading support
    Multithreading
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
    This processor does not support multithreading, the average processor does. 74.2% of processors support multithreading.
  • 23% lower PassMark score
    PassMark benchmark result
    8,144
    â–¼ Worse than 57% of models
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (8,144 vs 10,572.5). The average processor scores 10,572.5 in PassMark benchmark.
    8,144 vs 10,572.5
  • 2 fewer CPU threads
    CPU threads
    6
    â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
    Market range: <4 – >24
    This processor has fewer CPU threads than the average processor (6 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    6 vs 8
  • Lower base clock
    CPU base clock speed
    6 x 1.8 GHz
    â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
    This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (6x1.8 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz).
    6x1.8 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz
  • 1 fewer threads per core
    Threads per core
    1
    â–¼ Worse than 70% of models
    Market range: <0 – >2.5
    This processor has fewer threads per core than the average processor (1 vs 2). The average processor offers 2 threads per core.
    1 vs 2
  • 10 lower clock multiplier
    Clock multiplier
    18
    â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
    Market range: <16 – >38
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (18 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    18 vs 28
  • 16.7% larger process node
    Semiconductor size
    14 nm
    â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
    Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
    This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (14 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    14 nm vs 12 nm
  • 50% less L2 per core
    L2 per core
    0.25 MB/core
    â–¼ Worse than 63% of models
    Market range: <0.25 MB/core – >2 MB/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
  • 12.5% less L3 per core
    L3 per core
    1.5 MB/core
    â–¼ Worse than 54% of models
    Market range: <1 MB/core – >3 MB/core
    This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.5 MB/core vs 1.7 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.714 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    1.5 MB/core vs 1.714 MB/core
  • 40% smaller L2 cache
    L2 cache
    1.5 MB
    â–¼ Worse than 62% of models
    Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
    This processor has a lower L2 cache than the average processor (1.5 MB vs 2.5 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 2.5 MB.
    1.5 MB vs 2.5 MB
  • Lower JEDEC memory speed
    Max memory speed (JEDEC)
    DDR4-2666 MHz
    â–¼ Worse than 58% of models
    This processor has a lower JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (DDR4-2666 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    DDR4-2,666 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • 9.2% lower memory bandwidth
    Maximum memory bandwidth
    41.6 GB/s
    â–¼ Worse than 55% of models
    Market range: <25 GB/s – >100 GB/s
    This processor has a lower memory bandwidth than the average processor (41.6 GB/s vs 45.8 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 45.8 GB/s.
    41.6 GB/s vs 45.8 GB/s
  • 9.1% lower memory speed
    Maximum memory speed
    2,666 MHz
    â–¼ Worse than 55% of models
    Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
    This processor has a lower maximum memory speed than the average processor (2666 MHz vs 2933 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 2933 MHz.
    2,666 MHz vs 2,933 MHz

Video reviews

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

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

S
score.nero.com
29/03/2026
Summary of the review
Intel Core i5-9400T CPU @ 1.80GHz Benchmarks - Nero Score
B
browser.geekbench.com
28/03/2026
Summary of the review
Intel Core i5-9400T Benchmarks - Geekbench Browser
C
cpubenchmark.net
30/04/2024
Summary of the review
Intel Core i5-9400T @ 1.80GHz - CPU Benchmarks
C
cpubenchmark.net
Updated Daily
Summary of the review
Intel i5-9400T vs i3-8100 - CPU Benchmarks Would you like to see a comparison of these benchmark scores against more recent low-power T-series process...
C
cpubenchmark.net
Updated Daily
Summary of the review
Intel i5-9400T vs N95 vs N100 - CPU Benchmarks
S
simpletek.net
22/10/2026
Summary of the review
Intel Core i5-9400T 9th Gen – Tray CPU LGA1151 v2
(Translated)Show original
R
refurbed.be
30/03/2024
Summary of the review
Lenovo ThinkCentre M720q Tiny - Refurbished Desktop
(Translated)Show original
R
refurbed.nl
30/03/2024
Summary of the review
Lenovo ThinkCentre M720q Tiny - Refurbished Desktop Review
(Translated)Show original

Third-party reviews

What we like about Intel Core i5 9400T

  • Extremely low power consumption with a 35W TDP, making it ideal for energy-efficient or small-form-factor (SFF) builds.
  • Solid efficiency for general desktop tasks, office productivity, and web browsing.
  • Generates very little heat, allowing for quiet operation and compatibility with smaller cooling solutions.
  • Includes integrated Intel UHD Graphics 630, which is useful for systems without a dedicated GPU or for media serving like Plex.
  • Supports up to 128GB of DDR4 memory, providing a high ceiling for specific professional or multitasking needs.

What we don't like about Intel Core i5 9400T

  • Lower clock speeds (1.8 GHz base) compared to standard 9400 models, leading to roughly 13-15% slower performance in both single and multi-threaded tasks.
  • Lack of hyperthreading (6 cores/6 threads) can lead to 100% CPU usage and stuttering in modern, intensive games or heavy multitasking.
  • Considered a 'dead platform' by many, as upgrading beyond 9th gen requires a new motherboard.
  • Limited overclocking capabilities due to a locked multiplier.
  • May act as a significant bottleneck when paired with modern, high-end graphics cards in gaming scenarios.

Verdict

The Intel Core i5-9400T is a 9th-generation desktop processor designed for power efficiency, featuring 6 cores and 6 threads with a 1.8 GHz base frequency and a max turbo speed of 3.4 GHz. Built on a 14nm process for the LGA 1151 socket, it includes 9MB of Intel Smart Cache, supports up to 128GB of DDR4-2666 memory, and integrates Intel UHD Graphics 630. Its primary advantages are its low 35W TDP, making it ideal for compact or low-heat builds, and its solid multi-core performance for general productivity. However, it lacks hyper-threading, has significantly lower clock speeds than standard models, and is on a legacy platform that lacks a clear modern upgrade path.

Compare Intel Core i5 9400T 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 9400T and other processors

No results found