A8-3800 vs Core i5-10400F

CPU

GPU

A8-3800

4 Cores4 Thrd65 WWMax: 2.7 GHz2011

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Core i5-10400F

6 Cores12 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.3 GHz2020

Core family

·······

Buy on Amazon

A8-3800 vs Core i5-10400F Performance Spectrum

A8-3800

4 / 4

2,051

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i5-10400F

6 / 12

13,029

+535.3%

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.

A8-3800 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.

A8-3800 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.

A8-3800

2011

Why buy it

✅Costs $30 less on MSRP ($130 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 6550D, 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 Geekbench multi-core (1,350 vs 5,783).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.8 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($130 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).

Core i5-10400F

2020

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +260.3% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Delivers 416.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 15.8 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $130 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌
23.1% HIGHER MSRP
$160 MSRPvs$130 MSRP
❌No integrated graphics, while A8-3800 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-10400F better than A8-3800?

Yes. Core i5-10400F is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 260.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 328.4% better Geekbench multi-core, 535.3% higher PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i5-10400F is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 260.3% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i5-10400F is the stronger fit. You are getting 328.4% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core i5-10400F is the better buy right now. Core i5-10400F comes in 23.1% more expensive on MSRP at $160 MSRP versus $130 MSRP, and it still gives you a 260.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 416.1% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 15.8 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core i5-10400F makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2020 vs 2011) and more multi-core headroom with 6 cores / 12 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A8-3800 vs Core i5-10400F Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

A8-3800

The A8-3800 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Llano (2011−2012) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.7 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM1. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,051 points. Launch price was $90.

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 A8-3800 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i5-10400F offers 6 cores / 12 threads — the Core i5-10400F has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.7 GHz on the A8-3800 versus 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F — a 45.7% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.4 GHz vs 2.9 GHz). The A8-3800 uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Core i5-10400F uses Comet Lake (2020−2025) (14 nm). In PassMark, the A8-3800 scores 2,051 against the Core i5-10400F's 13,029 — a 145.6% lead for the Core i5-10400F. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 370 vs 1,454, a 118.9% lead for the Core i5-10400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 1,350 vs 5,783 (124.3% advantage for the Core i5-10400F). L3 cache: 0 kB on the A8-3800 vs 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F.

Feature	A8-3800	Core i5-10400F
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	6 / 12+50%
Boost Clock	2.7 GHz	4.3 GHz+59%
Base Clock	2.4 GHz	2.9 GHz+21%
L3 Cache	0 kB	12 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	256K (per core)+25500%
Process	32 nm	14 nm-56%
Architecture	Llano (2011−2012)	Comet Lake (2020−2025)
PassMark	2,051	13,029+535%
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	8,191
Geekbench 6 Single	370	1,454+293%
Geekbench 6 Multi	1,350	5,783+328%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A8-3800 uses the FM1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core i5-10400F uses LGA1200 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1866 on the A8-3800 versus DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F — the Core i5-10400F supports 42.9% 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 32 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: A55,A75 (A8-3800) and H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F).

Feature	A8-3800	Core i5-10400F
Socket	FM1	LGA1200
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1866	DDR4-2666+43%
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	128 GB+300%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A8-3800) vs VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F). The A8-3800 includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 6550D), while the Core i5-10400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A8-3800 targets Budget Desktop, Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: A8-3800 rivals Core i3-2100; Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.

Feature	A8-3800	Core i5-10400F
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	Radeon HD 6550D	—
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	AMD-V	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	Budget Desktop	Gaming

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the A8-3800 was priced at $130, while the Core i5-10400F came in at $160. On launch pricing ($130 vs $160), A8-3800 was $30 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the A8-3800 delivers 15.8 pts/$ vs 81.4 pts/$ for the Core i5-10400F — making the Core i5-10400F the 135.1% better value option.

Feature	A8-3800	Core i5-10400F
MSRP	$130-19%	$160
Performance per Dollar	15.8	81.4+415%
Release Date	2011	2020

Search A8-3800 on Amazon

Search Core i5-10400F on Amazon

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.