Athlon II X4 638 vs Core i5-10400F

Athlon II X4 638 vs Core i5-10400F Performance Spectrum

Athlon II X4 638

4 / 4

2,260

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i5-10400F

6 / 12

13,029

+476.5%

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.

Athlon II X4 638 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.

Athlon II X4 638 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.

Athlon II X4 638

2012

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (2,260 vs 13,029).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 7.5 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($300 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +233.4% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $140 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $300 MSRP).
✅Delivers 980.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 7.5 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $300 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Athlon II X4 638.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-10400F better than Athlon II X4 638?

Yes. Core i5-10400F is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 233.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 476.5% better 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 233.4% 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 476.5% better PassMark, 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 $140 cheaper on MSRP at $160 MSRP versus $300 MSRP, and it still gives you a 233.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 980.9% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 7.5 PassMark/$), 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 2012) 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.

Athlon II X4 638 vs Core i5-10400F Technical Specifications

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

Athlon II X4 638

The Athlon II X4 638 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Llano (2011−2012) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.7 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: 2,260 points. Launch price was $149.

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 Athlon II X4 638 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 Athlon II X4 638 versus 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F — a 45.7% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.7 GHz vs 2.9 GHz). The Athlon II X4 638 uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Core i5-10400F uses Comet Lake (2020−2025) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X4 638 scores 2,260 against the Core i5-10400F's 13,029 — a 140.9% lead for the Core i5-10400F. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon II X4 638 vs 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F.

Feature	Athlon II X4 638	Core i5-10400F
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	6 / 12+50%
Boost Clock	2.7 GHz	4.3 GHz+59%
Base Clock	2.7 GHz	2.9 GHz+7%
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	2,260	13,029+477%
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	8,191
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,454
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	5,783

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon II X4 638 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 Athlon II X4 638 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 64 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: AMD FM1 (Athlon II X4 638) and H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F).

Feature	Athlon II X4 638	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	64 GB	128 GB+100%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Athlon II X4 638) / VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.

Feature	Athlon II X4 638	Core i5-10400F
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	—	No
AVX-512	—	No
Virtualization	—	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	—	Gaming

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Athlon II X4 638 was priced at $300, while the Core i5-10400F came in at $160. On launch pricing ($300 vs $160), Core i5-10400F was $140 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon II X4 638 delivers 7.5 pts/$ vs 81.4 pts/$ for the Core i5-10400F — making the Core i5-10400F the 166.1% better value option.

Feature	Athlon II X4 638	Core i5-10400F
MSRP	$300	$160-47%
Performance per Dollar	7.5	81.4+985%
Release Date	2012	2020

Search Athlon II X4 638 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.