Intel Core i5-1350P vs Intel Core i9-10900F Comparison

# The Verdict

The Intel Core i9-10900F and Intel Core i5-1350P are close performers, but they serve entirely different markets. The data shows the i9-10900F wins all six head-to-head benchmark comparisons, yet the margins are razor-thin. Across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, the i9-10900F leads by between 1.4% and 1.7% in every test. That is a statistical tie in real-world terms, but the i9-10900F does win every single comparison.

The i9-10900F is a desktop part with a 65W TDP, 10 cores, and 20 threads, while the i5-1350P is a mobile processor with a 28W TDP, 12 cores, and 16 threads. The desktop chip reaches a 5.20 GHz boost clock versus 4.70 GHz for the mobile part. The i9-10900F also has a larger 20 MB shared L3 cache compared to 12 MB on the i5-1350P.

Who should pick which? The i9-10900F is the choice for a desktop build where raw multi-threaded performance matters, as it edges ahead in every Cinebench test. The i5-1350P is the choice for a laptop or compact mobile system, as it delivers nearly identical Cinebench scores while consuming less than half the power (28W versus 65W). The i5-1350P also includes integrated Iris Xe Graphics 80EU, so it can run without a discrete GPU, whereas the i9-10900F has no integrated graphics at all.

The i5-1350P holds a higher percentile ranking among all CPUs at 59, versus 58 for the i9-10900F. The average benchmark score also favors the mobile chip: 4776 for the i5-1350P against 4664 for the i9-10900F. That means in the broader database, the i5-1350P is marginally better positioned, even though the i9-10900F wins this direct head-to-head.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and process nodes. The i9-10900F uses Comet Lake architecture built on a 14 nm process, while the i5-1350P uses Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm node. Both are manufactured by Intel, but the newer Raptor Lake design is denser and more power-efficient.

Core configurations differ significantly. The i9-10900F has 10 cores and 20 threads, all of which are standard cores. The i5-1350P has 12 cores and 16 threads, indicating a hybrid design with fewer threads than cores — a mix of performance and efficiency cores. The i9-10900F has more threads overall, which helps in heavily threaded workloads.

Cache hierarchies are distinct. The i9-10900F offers 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, plus a 20 MB shared L3 cache. The i5-1350P provides 80 KB of L1 per core and a much larger 2 MB of L2 per core, but only 12 MB of shared L3. The larger L2 on the mobile chip compensates for its smaller L3.

Clock speeds favor the desktop part. The i9-10900F has a 2.80 GHz base clock and a 5.20 GHz boost clock. The i5-1350P has a 1900.00 MHz base clock and a 4.70 GHz boost clock. The i9-10900F's higher boost gives it a clear frequency advantage in single-threaded workloads.

Memory support differs. The i9-10900F supports DDR4 only, while the i5-1350P supports both DDR4 and DDR5. Both use dual-channel memory buses. The i9-10900F has a specified memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s, while the i5-1350P's bandwidth is not listed in the data.

PCIe capabilities are newer on the mobile chip. The i5-1350P provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the i9-10900F offers Gen 3 with 16 lanes. The i5-1350P also includes integrated Iris Xe Graphics 80EU; the i9-10900F has no integrated graphics.

Socket compatibility is entirely different: the i9-10900F uses Intel Socket 1200 for desktop motherboards, while the i5-1350P uses Intel BGA 1744, which is soldered for mobile systems.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The i5-1350P has 12 cores, while the i9-10900F has 10 cores. However, the i9-10900F has 20 threads versus 16 threads on the i5-1350P, meaning the desktop chip supports more concurrent threads.

Q: How big is the performance gap in multi-core workloads?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i9-10900F scores 16753 versus 16514 for the i5-1350P, a 1.4% lead. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the margin is 7036 versus 6935, also 1.5% in favor of the i9-10900F.

Q: Does the i5-1350P have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the i5-1350P includes Iris Xe Graphics 80EU. The i9-10900F has no integrated graphics at all, so it requires a discrete GPU for display output.

Q: Which processor is more power-efficient?

A: The i5-1350P has a 28W TDP, while the i9-10900F has a 65W TDP. The mobile chip consumes less than half the thermal design power.

Q: Which CPU supports newer memory standards?

A: The i5-1350P supports both DDR4 and DDR5. The i9-10900F supports DDR4 only.

Q: What is the release timeline difference?

A: The i9-10900F was released on 2020-04-29 and is end-of-life. The i5-1350P was released on 2023-01-03 and remains active in production.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field. Here is where they diverge:

• Cores: 10 (i9-10900F) versus 12 (i5-1350P)
• Threads: 20 (i9-10900F) versus 16 (i5-1350P)
• Base clock: 2.80 GHz (i9-10900F) versus 1900.00 MHz (i5-1350P)
• Boost clock: 5.20 GHz (i9-10900F) versus 4.70 GHz (i5-1350P)
• TDP: 65W (i9-10900F) versus 28W (i5-1350P)
• Socket: Intel Socket 1200 (i9-10900F) versus Intel BGA 1744 (i5-1350P)
• Architecture: Comet Lake (i9-10900F) versus Raptor Lake (i5-1350P)
• Process node: 14 nm (i9-10900F) versus 10 nm (i5-1350P)
• L1 cache per core: 64 KB (i9-10900F) versus 80 KB (i5-1350P)
• L2 cache per core: 256 KB (i9-10900F) versus 2 MB (i5-1350P)
• L3 cache: 20 MB shared (i9-10900F) versus 12 MB shared (i5-1350P)
• Memory support: DDR4 (i9-10900F) versus DDR4, DDR5 (i5-1350P)
• Memory bandwidth: 46.9 GB/s (i9-10900F) versus not listed (i5-1350P)
• PCIe: Gen 3, 16 lanes (i9-10900F) versus Gen 4, 20 lanes (i5-1350P)
• Integrated graphics: None (i9-10900F) versus Iris Xe Graphics 80EU (i5-1350P)
• Market segment: Desktop (i9-10900F) versus Mobile (i5-1350P)
• Production status: End-of-life (i9-10900F) versus Active (i5-1350P)
• Release date: 2020-04-29 (i9-10900F) versus 2023-01-03 (i5-1350P)
• Launch MSRP: $464 (i9-10900F) versus $320 (i5-1350P)
• Part number: SRH90 (i9-10900F) versus SRMJ5 (i5-1350P)

Both processors have ECC memory support as false, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data covers six Cinebench tests, and the i9-10900F wins all of them. The largest margin comes in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the i9-10900F scores 238 against 234 for the i5-1350P, a 1.7% advantage. That is the biggest delta in the entire comparison.

In multi-core tests, the i9-10900F maintains a consistent lead. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 1688 versus 1664, a 1.4% win. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 7036 versus 6935, a 1.5% margin. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 16753 versus 16514, again 1.4% in favor of the desktop chip.

Single-core performance follows the same pattern. Cinebench R20 single-core: 993 for the i9-10900F versus 979 for the i5-1350P, a 1.4% lead. Cinebench R23 single-core: 2365 versus 2331, a 1.5% margin. The i9-10900F's higher 5.20 GHz boost clock likely explains these consistent single-core wins.

The i5-1350P's best showing is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it trails by only 239 points. That is a narrow gap given the mobile chip's 28W TDP. The i9-10900F's 65W TDP buys it just a 1.4% performance edge in the most demanding workload.

Additional benchmarks from the i9-10900F's own data show strengths beyond Cinebench. It scores 7274 in 3DMark 16-thread, 7866 in 3DMark max-threads, and 8447 in Geekbench multi-core. Single-thread scores include 822 in 3DMark single-thread and 1708 in Geekbench single-core.

The i5-1350P's nearest rivals give context to its overall standing. Its average benchmark score of 4776 places it within 0.1% of the Intel Xeon W-1290E and 0.1% ahead of the AMD EPYC 7252. The i9-10900F, with an average score of 4664, sits 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core i9-9900KF and 0.4% behind the Intel Core i9-11900T.

The data shows a clear verdict: the i9-10900F wins every direct benchmark, but the i5-1350P delivers comparable performance in a fraction of the power envelope. For desktop users maximizing thread count, the i9-10900F is the winner. For mobile users needing integrated graphics and lower power, the i5-1350P is the practical choice. The 1.4-1.7% margins are negligible for most workloads, so the decision comes down to platform and power requirements rather than raw speed.