Why you can trust Tom's Hardware
Intel Core i5-14400 Gaming Performance — The TLDR
Below, you can see the geometric mean of our gaming tests at 1080p and 1440p, with each resolution split into its own separate chart. The first series of charts have the chips tested in overclocked memory/chip configurations, while the second series removes overclocked configurations to simply the results. Per our standard policy, we tested with an Nvidia GeForce RTX 4090 to reduce GPU-imposed bottlenecks as much as possible. Still, differences between test subjects will shrink with less powerful cards or higher resolutions.
Due to the minor clock speed improvements, the $225 Core i5-14400 provides roughly the same performance as the previous-gen Core i5-13400 — the ~1% difference between the chips in our cumulative metric falls within the noise of our test results. We tested the 14400 with both DDR4 and DDR5, and even though the DDR4 configuration edges ahead by 2%, it's close enough to consider a tie.
Increasing the memory transfer rate to DDR5-6800 via XMP is 14% faster than the stock configuration, but you don't have to splurge on a pricey kit — lower-tier memory will deliver the lion's share of the gain. The tuned DDR5 config is also 8% faster than the DDR4-3600 setup, showing that DDR5 has more legroom for gaming performance increases.
The $210 Ryzen 5 7600X shines, tying the 14400 DDR5-6800 configuration at stock settings and delivering 14% more performance than the stock Core i5-14400. Flipping on EXPO and Precision Boost Overdrive (PBO) brings the memory to DDR5-6400 and provides another 5% boost to performance. This Zen 4 chips' lower price point represents better value for your dollar, and reduced pricing for B650 and DDR5 ensures this is a better processor to build around if you're looking for a strong all-rounder. We use the Ryzen 5 7600X as a proxy for the Ryzen 5 7600, which weighs in at $190 and offers about 3% less gaming performance than the 7600X. This chip is also a strong contender in the $200 price range.
The $245 Ryzen 7 5700X3D is even more impressive. For $25 more, the 5700X3D is an incredible 30% faster than the stock Core i5-14400. This chip doesn't officially support overclocking, but crafty motherboard vendors have sidestepped those limitations with BIOS tweaks. Enabling PBO gives us a 2% gain, and enabling memory overclocking confers another slight gain, resulting in a 3.5% performance gain overall with very affordable memory. That's 23% faster than the Core i5-14400 configuration with overclocked memory.
The Ryzen 5 5700X3D drops into the affordable previous-gen AM4 platform and is powered by the previous-gen Zen 3 architecture, but it features AMD's X3D tech. This technology arms the chip with an increased L3 cache capacity to deliver outstanding performance in gaming, but it does result in lower performance in applications. Regardless, if you're only interested in gaming and can accept the shortcomings, or if you're upgrading an existing AM4 system, the 5700X3D is a strong contender.
Pricing pressure from both the less-expensive Ryzen 5 7600/X and the slightly more expensive Ryzen 5 5700X3D, both of which convincingly beat the 14400 in gaming, means we can't recommend the Core i5-14400 for gaming-centric builds unless you're looking to save every penny and cobble together a system with DDR4.
The deltas in these charts can be slim, and large deltas in individual game titles, like with the 5700X3D and the 5800X3D, impact cumulative measurements. Performance deltas between AMD and Intel chips can vary based on the title (particularly with DDR4 vs. DDR5) and the GPU you use. It's best to make an informed decision based on the types of titles you play most frequently, so be sure to check out the individual tests below.
Borderlands 3 on Intel Core i5-14400
Cyberpunk 2077 on Intel Core i5-14400
F1 2023 on Intel Core i5-14400
Far Cry 6 on Intel Core i5-14400
Hitman 3 on Intel Core i5-14400
Minecraft on Intel Core i5-14400
Microsoft Flight Simulator 2021 on Intel Core i5-14400
Watch Dogs Legion on Intel Core i5-14400
Current page: Intel Core i5-14400 Gaming Performance
Prev Page Intel Core i5-14400 Power Consumption, Overclocking, Test Setup Next Page Intel Core i5-14400 Productivity BenchmarksPaul Alcorn is the Managing Editor: News and Emerging Tech for Tom's Hardware US. He also writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage, and enterprise hardware.
-
-Fran- Snake oil? Le gasp!Reply
In any case, I have to say I'm surprised the perf/$ kind of sucks with this chip (not suck, but not beat AMD as it was the case). This was the last bastion for Intel to claim "superiority" from recent memory, so it's surprising.
Thanks for the review and great data, Paul!
Regards. -
usertests I didn't realize the 7600X was that far behind the 5000X3D CPUs.Reply
Seems the gap is wider than this review:
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-9-7950x-ryzen-5-7600x-cpu-review/6 -
edzieba Particular for DIY upgraders, the DDR4 aspect for Raptor Lake still likely makes it more attractive in total upgrade (CPU + mobo + RAM) perf/$. Even with DDR5 getting less expensive, it will still be more expensive than paying nothing to re-use your current DDR4 DIMMs.Reply -
TerryLaze
I'm just wondering, but what exactly is surprising about a company having to sell older technology for less money, or newer for more, anyway you take it.-Fran- said:Snake oil? Le gasp!
In any case, I have to say I'm surprised the perf/$ kind of sucks with this chip (not suck, but not beat AMD as it was the case). This was the last bastion for Intel to claim "superiority" from recent memory, so it's surprising.
Thanks for the review and great data, Paul!
Regards.
The 7600x was $300 when it came out...and now AMD is forced to sell it for 70% of that because of the x3d CPUs and the newer intel CPUs, even though it is current gen. -
rluker5 The 14th series pricing is not the best compared to older named products. You can buy the same chip, but faster, unlocked and at 2/3 the price at Newegg right now: the 12600kf https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i5-12600kf-core-i5-12th-gen/p/N82E16819118349Reply
It would probably beat the 7600x(at $210) for $155. A real world performance/price thrashing. Although you would have to buy a $20 cooler if you didn't already have one: https://www.amazon.com/Thermalright-Assassin-SE-Heatpipes-TL-C12C/dp/B09Y869Z8B/ref=sr_1_20?crid=2SX1Y3LFI5SQZ&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.oWn8-RfUPfvuDzeOWU8_36bSlzc8uRnTjORmhoO2C0vsUFZ2STUVF1WtAEnZKG4Z-zUmrifpulpSJuMlZsGSFeEKCMLhJtaGVL11yTUskSdNXF1vBh_BKnhNbXbFp3tXCfLhF5edknjQiEoY5HyH03kxieOlLxKUutlOXeloABhP1HFS0d8K3bcCwNERJBSq830llUJSSoS_NVuNQxFQtR_-9MBwMGiEx6rd9EcgLtA.GH6nMT41xmldgof1e-hTaPzaY_pNrkZhB5XDJ4IX1Mo&dib_tag=se&keywords=lga%2B1700%2Bcooler&qid=1713446673&sprefix=lga%2B1700%2Bcoo%2Caps%2C104&sr=8-20&th=1 -
Roland Of Gilead The base and boost clocks for the 14400/13400 are reversed in the first table.Reply -
strobolt I don't quite understand why the article mentions "adequate stock cooler" as a pro but then also within the article it's mentioned that "we always recommend upgrading the stock cooler". If the stock cooler is adequate then what's the reason for upgrading? I understand that some people who run very extensive multithreaded workloads and in warmer climate you might end up with excessive noise and even bottlenecking but the average gamer / productivity user in a airconditioned environment probably doesn't even notice the difference. And even in gaming when you want to run high fps, the GPU is likely going to make so much noise that the CPU cooler is not distinguishable anyway.Reply -
-Fran-
Saying the i5 14400 is "new" is a big stretch given is a toss between being a re-hashed Alder or a defective Raptor.TerryLaze said:I'm just wondering, but what exactly is surprising about a company having to sell older technology for less money, or newer for more, anyway you take it.
The 7600x was $300 when it came out...and now AMD is forced to sell it for 70% of that because of the x3d CPUs and the newer intel CPUs, even though it is current gen.
As for the price: Intel decided that price point, so they have only themselves to blame. I believe Intel thinks they can get away with people not doing their research (much like AMD does as well; 5700 non-G, looking at you) only looking at the price point relative to the rest.
That's what is surprising to me: why didn't Intel read the room and chose such a price point that would make them look bad. Weird. Are they with no other options anymore?
Regards.