
A6-7000

Core i5-10400F
A6-7000 vs Core i5-10400F Performance Spectrum
About PassMark
PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.
A6-7000 vs Core i5-10400F FPS Benchmarks
Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.
Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Valorant

Among Us

Apex Legends

ARC Raiders

Baldur's Gate 3

Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
A6-7000 vs Core i5-10400F: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
A6-7000
2014Why buy it
- ✅Costs $60 less on MSRP ($100 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 1W instead of 65W, a 64W reduction.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon R4 Graphics, while Core i5-10400F needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (1,002 vs 13,029).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.0 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($100 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Core i5-10400F
2020Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +602.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Delivers 712.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 10.0 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $100 MSRP).
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike A6-7000.
Trade-offs
- ❌60% HIGHER MSRP$160 MSRPvs$100 MSRP
- ❌6400% higher power demand at 65W vs 1W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while A6-7000 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i5-10400F better than A6-7000?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
A6-7000 vs Core i5-10400F Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

A6-7000
The A6-7000 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Kaveri (2014−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L2 cache: 1024 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT3. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,002 points. Launch price was $70.

Core i5-10400F
The Core i5-10400F is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 April 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 2.9 GHz, with boost up to 4.3 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1200. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 13,029 points. Launch price was $155.
Processing Power
The A6-7000 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Core i5-10400F offers 6 cores / 12 threads — the Core i5-10400F has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3 GHz on the A6-7000 versus 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F — a 35.6% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.2 GHz vs 2.9 GHz). The A6-7000 uses the Kaveri (2014−2015) architecture (28 nm), while the Core i5-10400F uses Comet Lake (2020−2025) (14 nm). In PassMark, the A6-7000 scores 1,002 against the Core i5-10400F's 13,029 — a 171.4% lead for the Core i5-10400F.
| Feature | A6-7000 | Core i5-10400F |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 6 / 12+200% |
| Boost Clock | 3 GHz | 4.3 GHz+43% |
| Base Clock | 2.2 GHz | 2.9 GHz+32% |
| L3 Cache | — | 12 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 1024 kB+300% | 256K (per core) |
| Process | 28 nm | 14 nm-50% |
| Architecture | Kaveri (2014−2015) | Comet Lake (2020−2025) |
| PassMark | 1,002 | 13,029+1200% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | — | 8,191 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 1,454 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 5,783 |
Memory & Platform
The A6-7000 uses the FT3 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i5-10400F uses LGA1200 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 1600 on the A6-7000 versus DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F — the Core i5-10400F supports 66.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i5-10400F supports up to 128 GB of RAM compared to 16 GB — 700% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (A6-7000) vs 2 (Core i5-10400F). Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: FP3 (A6-7000) and H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F).
| Feature | A6-7000 | Core i5-10400F |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FT3 | LGA1200 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | 1600 | DDR4-2666+67% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB | 128 GB+700% |
| RAM Channels | 1 | 2+100% |
| ECC Support | No | No |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: true (A6-7000) vs VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F). The A6-7000 includes integrated graphics (Radeon R4 Graphics), while the Core i5-10400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: A6-7000 rivals Pentium 3556U; Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.
| Feature | A6-7000 | Core i5-10400F |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | Radeon R4 Graphics | — |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | true | VT-x, VT-d |
| Target Use | — | Gaming |
Value Analysis
At launch, the A6-7000 was priced at $100, while the Core i5-10400F came in at $160. On launch pricing ($100 vs $160), A6-7000 was $60 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the A6-7000 delivers 10.0 pts/$ vs 81.4 pts/$ for the Core i5-10400F — making the Core i5-10400F the 156.2% better value option.
| Feature | A6-7000 | Core i5-10400F |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $100-38% | $160 |
| Performance per Dollar | 10.0 | 81.4+714% |
| Release Date | 2014 | 2020 |
Affiliate Disclosure
ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.
Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
















