
Celeron 1007U

Core i5-10400F
Celeron 1007U 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.
Celeron 1007U 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
Celeron 1007U 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.
Celeron 1007U
2013Why buy it
- β Draws 17W instead of 65W, a 48W reduction.
- β Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge), while Core i5-10400F needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- βWorse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- βLower PassMark (1,610 vs 13,029).
- βSmaller total L3 cache (2 MB vs 12 MB).
- βNo boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Core i5-10400F
2020Why buy it
- β Better for gaming: +354.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- β +500% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 2 MB).
- β Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Celeron 1007U.
Trade-offs
- βLaunch MSRP is still $160 MSRP, while Celeron 1007U mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- β282.4% higher power demand at 65W vs 17W.
- βNo integrated graphics, while Celeron 1007U can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i5-10400F better than Celeron 1007U?
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?
Celeron 1007U vs Core i5-10400F Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Celeron 1007U
The Celeron 1007U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 January 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012β2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 1.5 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,610 points. Launch price was $86.

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 (2020β2025) 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 Celeron 1007U packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Core i5-10400F offers 6 cores / 12 threads β the Core i5-10400F has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 1.5 GHz on the Celeron 1007U versus 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F β a 96.6% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 1.5 GHz vs 2.9 GHz). The Celeron 1007U uses the Ivy Bridge (2012β2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Core i5-10400F uses Comet Lake (2020β2025) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 1007U scores 1,610 against the Core i5-10400F's 13,029 β a 156% lead for the Core i5-10400F. L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 1007U vs 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F.
| Feature | Celeron 1007U | Core i5-10400F |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 6 / 12+200% |
| Boost Clock | 1.5 GHz | 4.3 GHz+187% |
| Base Clock | 1.5 GHz | 2.9 GHz+93% |
| L3 Cache | 2 MB (total) | 12 MB (total)+500% |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 256K (per core) |
| Process | 22 nm | 14 nm-36% |
| Architecture | Ivy Bridge (2012β2013) | Comet Lake (2020β2025) |
| PassMark | 1,610 | 13,029+709% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | β | 8,191 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | β | 1,454 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | β | 5,783 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron 1007U uses the BGA1023 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i5-10400F uses LGA1200 (PCIe 3.0) β making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1600 on the Celeron 1007U versus DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F β 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 32 GB β 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: Intel FCBGA1023 (Celeron 1007U) and H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F).
| Feature | Celeron 1007U | Core i5-10400F |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | BGA1023 | LGA1200 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1600 | DDR4-2666+67% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 32 GB | 128 GB+300% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | No | No |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Celeron 1007U) / VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F). The Celeron 1007U includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)), while the Core i5-10400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.
| Feature | Celeron 1007U | Core i5-10400F |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) | β |
| Unlocked | β | No |
| AVX-512 | β | No |
| Virtualization | β | VT-x, VT-d |
| Target Use | β | Gaming |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













