
Celeron U3400

Core i5-10400F
Celeron U3400 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 U3400 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 U3400 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 U3400
2010Why buy it
- ✅Costs $74 less on MSRP ($86 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 18W instead of 65W, a 47W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (575 vs 13,029).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (2 MB vs 12 MB).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 6.7 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($86 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Core i5-10400F
2020Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +1161.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+500% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 2 MB).
- ✅Delivers 1117.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 6.7 PassMark/$ ($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 U3400.
Trade-offs
- ❌86% HIGHER MSRP$160 MSRPvs$86 MSRP
- ❌261.1% higher power demand at 65W vs 18W.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i5-10400F better than Celeron U3400?
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 U3400 vs Core i5-10400F Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Celeron U3400
The Celeron U3400 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Westmere (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.06 GHz, with boost up to 0.07 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1288. Thermal design power (TDP): 18 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-800. Passmark benchmark score: 575 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 Celeron U3400 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 0.07 GHz on the Celeron U3400 versus 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F — a 193.6% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 1.06 GHz vs 2.9 GHz). The Celeron U3400 uses the Westmere (2010−2011) architecture (32 nm), while the Core i5-10400F uses Comet Lake (2020−2025) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron U3400 scores 575 against the Core i5-10400F's 13,029 — a 183.1% lead for the Core i5-10400F. L3 cache: 2 MB on the Celeron U3400 vs 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F.
| Feature | Celeron U3400 | Core i5-10400F |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 6 / 12+200% |
| Boost Clock | 0.07 GHz | 4.3 GHz+6043% |
| Base Clock | 1.06 GHz | 2.9 GHz+174% |
| L3 Cache | 2 MB | 12 MB (total)+500% |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB+100% | 256K (per core) |
| Process | 32 nm | 14 nm-56% |
| Architecture | Westmere (2010−2011) | Comet Lake (2020−2025) |
| PassMark | 575 | 13,029+2166% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | — | 8,191 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 1,454 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 5,783 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron U3400 uses the BGA1288 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core i5-10400F uses LGA1200 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Celeron U3400 | Core i5-10400F |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | BGA1288 | LGA1200 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 3.0+50% |
| Max RAM Speed | — | DDR4-2666 |
| Max RAM Capacity | — | 128 GB |
| RAM Channels | — | 2 |
| ECC Support | — | No |
| PCIe Lanes | — | 16 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Celeron U3400) / 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 | Celeron U3400 | Core i5-10400F |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | — | No |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | VT-x, VT-d |
| Target Use | — | Gaming |
Value Analysis
At launch, the Celeron U3400 was priced at $86, while the Core i5-10400F came in at $160. On launch pricing ($86 vs $160), Celeron U3400 was $74 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron U3400 delivers 6.7 pts/$ vs 81.4 pts/$ for the Core i5-10400F — making the Core i5-10400F the 169.6% better value option.
| Feature | Celeron U3400 | Core i5-10400F |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $86-46% | $160 |
| Performance per Dollar | 6.7 | 81.4+1115% |
| Release Date | 2010 | 2020 |
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.
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.














