Core i3-8100 vs Core i3-9100F vs Core i5-9400F vs Core i7-9700K Bottleneck: RTX 2060 Analysis

Core i3-8100

Entry-level desktop processor released in 2017 with 4 cores and 4 threads. With base clock at 3.6GHz, max speed at 3.6GHz, and a 65W power rating. Core i3-8100 is based on the Coffee Lake 14nm family and part of the Core i3 series.

Core i3-9100F

Entry-level desktop processor released in 2019 with 4 cores and 4 threads. With base clock at 3.6GHz, max speed at 4.2GHz, and a 65W power rating. Core i3-9100F is based on the Coffee Lake Refresh 14nm family and part of the Core i3 series.

Core i5-9400F

Mid-range desktop processor released in 2019 with 6 cores and 6 threads. With base clock at 2.9GHz, max speed at 4.1GHz, and a 65W power rating. Core i5-9400F is based on the Coffee Lake Refresh 14nm family and part of the Core i5 series.

Core i7-9700K

High-end desktop processor released in 2018 with 8 cores and 8 threads. With base clock at 3.6GHz, max speed at 4.9GHz, and a 95W power rating. Core i7-9700K is based on the Coffee Lake Refresh 14nm family and part of the Core i7 series.

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 - 1080p Bottleneck Analysis

Bottleneck depends on many factors, which include: the cpu, the gpu, and the game. Bottleneck Summary of Core i3-8100 vs Core i3-9100F vs Core i5-9400F vs Core i7-9700K Bottleneck: RTX 2060 Analysis based on the benchmark of 6 games at 1080p using NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060:

CPU Average Bottleneck (Lower is better)
Intel Core i3-8100 33.1%
Intel Core i3-9100F 31.2%
Intel Core i5-9400F 21.5%
Intel Core i7-9700K 10%

Battlefield V - 1080p

Forza Horizon 4 - 1080p

Grand Theft Auto V - 1080p

PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds - 1080p

Shadow of the Tomb Raider - 1080p

Apex Legends - 1080p

In an ideal world what we want to see is a nice slim 'fuzzy' line stretching from one end on the chart to the other. What we do not want to see are 'spikes'. This spikes are delays in frame time rendering and are where stuttering will occur if they go above a given threshold.

Random, thin spikes are not too much of an issue however should there be a block of spikes in close proximity to one another, especially if these spike jump quite high will likely be noticeable and interpreted as 'stutter'.

Using Frame Time Analysis as a means of measuring GPU performance is clearly a valuable tool. So much so that some would say it should replace the frames per second method of measuring performance. We would tend to agree because as previously stated, it is little point in having a GPU that can produce stupidly high framerates if the end product results in choppy gameplay. For gamers, frame time latency is clearly the better measurement as it is what 'gaming experience can be measured upon'.

Sure, a frametime graph can show you which is the faster card simply by it's length and thus the number of frames rendered over a given period but to get an accurate figure you would also have to calculate this yourself to gain an accurate, by the second average FPS figure. It's no good saying an entry level card has excellent frame time latency and then comparing it to a much faster (FPS) card which has a slower latency. IF both cards are below your own perceived level then you would obviously go with the faster card.