Intel BX80684I79700F

The i7-9700F hits a 2,731 single-thread PassMark score, good for the 77th percentile, but the 13,145 multi-core score is held back by the lack of Hyper-Threading. Efficiency and platform scores are rough at the 32nd and 18th percentiles. It's a decent stopgap if you find it cheap, but the dead-end socket makes it a tough long-term buy.

The 2,731 single-thread PassMark score is the headline here. At the 77th percentile, it's well above average and means this chip still handles single-threaded workloads like a champ. Games that lean on one or two cores, older productivity apps, and general desktop snappiness all benefit from that 4.70 GHz turbo. The 8 physical cores without Hyper-Threading means the 13,145 multi-core score lands at the 65th percentile, which is solid but not spectacular. You'll notice the ceiling when you're rendering video or running heavily threaded workloads.

The 12 MB of Intel Smart Cache is adequate for this class of chip, but it's not going to mask the memory latency issues that come with the older platform. The efficiency score sits at the 32nd percentile, which is underwhelming. This chip pulls more power than it should for the performance it delivers, especially compared to newer architectures. The feature set is also thin, landing at the 20th percentile. No integrated graphics, no PCIe 4.0, no DDR5 support. You're buying raw clock speed and core count, and that's about it.

Stacked against the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D, this chip gets embarrassed. The 9800X3D is a current-gen monster with 3D V-Cache that demolishes the 9700F in gaming and productivity. But that's not a fair fight, the 9800X3D costs several times more. The more realistic comparison is against other used or budget options. The 9700F's 2,731 single-thread score actually holds up well against many newer budget chips, but the 13,145 multi-core score falls behind anything with Hyper-Threading or SMT. The G.Skill Trident Z Neo and MICRO CENTER 265KFPRO890WIFI listings in our database are bundles or newer platforms that offer better long-term value. The Lenovo Ryzen 5 spare part and the ancient ADVB3 Phenom II X6 aren't even in the same conversation, the Phenom II is a museum piece at this point.

The real trade-off is platform longevity. The 9700F sits on a dead-end socket with the 18th percentile platform score. Any modern budget chip, even a Ryzen 5, gives you an upgrade path. That's worth more than a few hundred PassMark points.

Pricing on this chip is all over the place. The single US listing shows USD 250, while EUR listings range from EUR 299 to EUR 429 across DE, ES, FR, and IT. That's a EUR 130 spread, which is wild for the same processor. If you're in Europe, the EUR 299 listing is the one to hunt down, the EUR 429 price is frankly absurd for a chip this old. The CAD 456 listing in Canada and BRL 2,659 in Brazil both reflect the import tax reality of those markets more than the chip's actual worth.

At USD 250, the value proposition is borderline. You're getting 77th percentile single-thread performance and 65th percentile multi-thread, but the affordability score sits at just the 33rd percentile. That tells you most CPUs in our database offer better price-to-performance. The budget score of 52.3 out of 100 confirms it, this isn't a bargain, it's a stopgap.

The i7-9700F pulls a 13,145 multi-core PassMark score, which lands it in the 65th percentile of our database. That's a solid showing for an 8-core chip from 2019, but the 2,731 single-core score is where things get interesting, it sits at the 77th percentile and tells you this CPU still has some fight left for everyday tasks and gaming. The 4.70 GHz turbo clock does a lot of the heavy lifting here, especially since there's no Hyper-Threading to fall back on. You get 8 cores and 8 threads, which was a deliberate Intel decision that still stings for anyone doing heavy multitasking or rendering work.

Our scoring puts total performance at 47.7 out of 100, with productivity at 52.9 and budget at 52.3. The weakest area is server workloads at 36.8, which makes sense given the lack of threads and the aging platform. The 12 MB of cache is fine, but it's not going to blow anyone away. If you're looking at this chip in 2025, you're either on a tight budget or you found a used one for cheap. Either way, the numbers tell a story of a capable but aging workhorse.

Skip this chip if you do any serious rendering, streaming, or heavily threaded work. The 8 threads without Hyper-Threading will bottleneck you, and the multi-core score of 13,145 at the 65th percentile isn't going to cut it for modern workloads. Also skip it if you care about efficiency, the 32nd percentile efficiency score means you're burning more power than you should for this level of performance. And if you're building a new system from scratch, the 18th percentile platform score is a dealbreaker. You'd be locking yourself into a dead socket with no upgrade path. The only people who should consider this are those with a compatible motherboard already in hand and a strict budget.

The i7-9700F is a capable chip for single-threaded tasks and light gaming, but the lack of Hyper-Threading and the dead-end platform make it hard to recommend in 2025. The 2,731 single-thread score is genuinely good, and the 4.70 GHz turbo keeps everyday tasks feeling responsive. But the 32nd percentile efficiency and 20th percentile feature set mean you're paying for old tech. If you can find one for around USD 250 or EUR 299, and you already have a compatible motherboard, it's a reasonable stopgap. Otherwise, save your money for something with a future.