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 G1630 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 G1630 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 G1630

2013

Why buy it

✅Costs $118 less on MSRP ($42 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
✅Draws 55W instead of 65W, a 10W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge), while Core i5-10400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 47 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (635 vs 5,783).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (2 MB vs 12 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 40.6 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($42 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +334.8% higher average FPS across 47 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+500% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 2 MB).
✅Delivers 100.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 40.6 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $42 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Celeron G1630.

Trade-offs

❌
281% HIGHER MSRP
$160 MSRPvs$42 MSRP
❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron G1630 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-10400F better than Celeron G1630?

Yes. Core i5-10400F is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 334.8% average FPS lead across 47 shared CPU game tests in our data, 810.7% better Geekbench multi-core, 663.3% 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 334.8% more average FPS across 47 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 810.7% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 500% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 2 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 281.0% more expensive on MSRP at $160 MSRP versus $42 MSRP, and it still gives you a 334.8% average FPS lead across 47 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.4% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 40.6 PassMark/$), 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 2013), 500% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 2 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 6 cores / 12 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron G1630 vs Core i5-10400F Technical Specifications

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

Celeron G1630

The Celeron G1630 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1155. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,707 points. Launch price was $80.

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 Celeron G1630 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 2.8 GHz on the Celeron G1630 versus 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F — a 42.3% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.8 GHz vs 2.9 GHz). The Celeron G1630 uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Core i5-10400F uses Comet Lake (2020−2025) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron G1630 scores 1,707 against the Core i5-10400F's 13,029 — a 153.7% lead for the Core i5-10400F. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 386 vs 1,454, a 116.1% lead for the Core i5-10400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 635 vs 5,783 (160.4% advantage for the Core i5-10400F). L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron G1630 vs 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F.

Feature	Celeron G1630	Core i5-10400F
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	6 / 12+200%
Boost Clock	2.8 GHz	4.3 GHz+54%
Base Clock	2.8 GHz	2.9 GHz+4%
L3 Cache	2 MB (total)	12 MB (total)+500%
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	256K (per core)
Process	22 nm	14 nm-36%
Architecture	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)	Comet Lake (2020−2025)
PassMark	1,707	13,029+663%
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	8,191
Geekbench 6 Single	386	1,454+277%
Geekbench 6 Multi	635	5,783+811%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron G1630 uses the LGA1155 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 DDR3-1333 on the Celeron G1630 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 32 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: H61,B75,H77,Z77 (Celeron G1630) and H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F).

Feature	Celeron G1630	Core i5-10400F
Socket	LGA1155	LGA1200
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	DDR4-2666+100%
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	128 GB+300%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	Yes	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron G1630) vs VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F). The Celeron G1630 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)), while the Core i5-10400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G1630 targets Budget, Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Celeron G1630 rivals Pentium G2030; Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.

Feature	Celeron G1630	Core i5-10400F
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)	—
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	Budget	Gaming

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Celeron G1630 was priced at $42, while the Core i5-10400F came in at $160. On launch pricing ($42 vs $160), Celeron G1630 was $118 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron G1630 delivers 40.6 pts/$ vs 81.4 pts/$ for the Core i5-10400F — making the Core i5-10400F the 66.8% better value option.

Feature	Celeron G1630	Core i5-10400F
MSRP	$42-74%	$160
Performance per Dollar	40.6	81.4+100%
Release Date	2013	2020

Search Celeron G1630 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.