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 900 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.

Celeron 900 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 900

2009

Why buy it

✅Costs $74 less on MSRP ($86 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (229 vs 5,783).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (1 MB vs 12 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 5.6 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($86 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +1347.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+1100% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 1 MB).
✅Delivers 1343.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 5.6 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $86 MSRP).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Celeron 900.

Trade-offs

❌
86% HIGHER MSRP
$160 MSRPvs$86 MSRP
❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-10400F better than Celeron 900?

Yes. Core i5-10400F is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1347.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 2425.3% better Geekbench multi-core, 2586.4% 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 1347.9% 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 2425.3% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 1100% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 1 MB).

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 86.0% more expensive on MSRP at $160 MSRP versus $86 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1347.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 1343.9% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 5.6 PassMark/$), 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 2009) and 1100% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 1 MB). That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron 900 vs Core i5-10400F Technical Specifications

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

Celeron 900

The Celeron 900 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. Base frequency: 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 485 points. Launch price was $69.

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 Core i5-10400F is built on the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture. In PassMark, the Celeron 900 scores 485 against the Core i5-10400F's 13,029 — a 185.6% lead for the Core i5-10400F. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 220 vs 1,454, a 147.4% lead for the Core i5-10400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 229 vs 5,783 (184.8% advantage for the Core i5-10400F). L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache on the Celeron 900 vs 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F.

Feature	Celeron 900	Core i5-10400F
Cores / Threads	—	6 / 12
Boost Clock	—	4.3 GHz
Base Clock	2.2 GHz	2.9 GHz+32%
L3 Cache	1 MB L2 Cache	12 MB (total)+1100%
L2 Cache	—	256K (per core)
Process	45 nm	14 nm-69%
Architecture	—	Comet Lake (2020−2025)
PassMark	485	13,029+2586%
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	8,191
Geekbench 6 Single	220	1,454+561%
Geekbench 6 Multi	229	5,783+2425%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 900 uses the PGA478 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 DDR3-1333 on the Celeron 900 versus DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F — the Core i5-10400F supports 100% 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 4 GB — 3100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (Celeron 900) vs 2 (Core i5-10400F). PCIe lanes: 0 (Celeron 900) vs 16 (Core i5-10400F) — the Core i5-10400F offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: GL40,GM45 (Celeron 900) and H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F).

Feature	Celeron 900	Core i5-10400F
Socket	PGA478	LGA1200
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	DDR4-2666+100%
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	128 GB+3100%
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	0	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: No (Celeron 900) vs VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F). Primary use case: Celeron 900 targets Budget, Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Celeron 900 rivals Pentium 4 2.80; Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.

Feature	Celeron 900	Core i5-10400F
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	No	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	Budget	Gaming

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Celeron 900 was priced at $86, while the Core i5-10400F came in at $160. On launch pricing ($86 vs $160), Celeron 900 was $74 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron 900 delivers 5.6 pts/$ vs 81.4 pts/$ for the Core i5-10400F — making the Core i5-10400F the 174.1% better value option.

Feature	Celeron 900	Core i5-10400F
MSRP	$86-46%	$160
Performance per Dollar	5.6	81.4+1354%
Release Date	2009	2020

Search Celeron 900 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.