Core i5-10400 vs Xeon E5-2692 v2

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.

Core i5-10400 vs Xeon E5-2692 v2 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.

Core i5-10400 vs Xeon E5-2692 v2: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core i5-10400

2020

Why buy it

✅Draws 65W instead of 100W, a 35W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Xeon E5-2692 v2 needs a discrete GPU.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Stock), unlike Xeon E5-2692 v2.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (11,988 vs 12,119).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 30 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2692 v2, which brings 12 cores / 24 threads.
❌Launch MSRP is still $182 MSRP, while Xeon E5-2692 v2 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Xeon E5-2692 v2

2013

Why buy it

✅+1.1% higher PassMark.
✅+150% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 12 cores / 24 threads.

Trade-offs

❌53.8% higher power demand at 100W vs 65W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i5-10400 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-10400 better than Xeon E5-2692 v2?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5-2692 v2 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i5-10400 is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon E5-2692 v2 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.1% better PassMark, backed by 12 cores and 24 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 150% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 12 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core i5-10400 is the better buy right now. Core i5-10400 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $182 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Xeon E5-2692 v2 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 1.1% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (65.9 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 i5-10400 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2020 vs 2013). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i5-10400 vs Xeon E5-2692 v2 Technical Specifications

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

Core i5-10400

The Core i5-10400 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: DDR4-2666. Passmark benchmark score: 11,988 points. Launch price was $149.

Xeon E5-2692 v2

The Xeon E5-2692 v2 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Ivy Bridge-EP (2013) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 30 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 100 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 12,119 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400 packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Xeon E5-2692 v2 offers 12 cores / 24 threads — the Xeon E5-2692 v2 has 6 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400 versus 3 GHz on the Xeon E5-2692 v2 — a 35.6% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400 (base: 2.9 GHz vs 2.2 GHz). The Core i5-10400 uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon E5-2692 v2 uses Ivy Bridge-EP (2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400 scores 11,988 against the Xeon E5-2692 v2's 12,119 — a 1.1% lead for the Xeon E5-2692 v2. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400 vs 30 MB (total) on the Xeon E5-2692 v2.

Feature	Core i5-10400	Xeon E5-2692 v2
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	12 / 24+100%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+43%	3 GHz
Base Clock	2.9 GHz+32%	2.2 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	30 MB (total)+150%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm-36%	22 nm
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Ivy Bridge-EP (2013)
PassMark	11,988	12,119+1%
Cinebench R23 Multi	8,313	—
Geekbench 6 Single	1,600	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-10400 uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E5-2692 v2 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i5-10400	Xeon E5-2692 v2
Socket	LGA1200	LGA2011
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	—
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i5-10400) / not specified (Xeon E5-2692 v2). The Core i5-10400 includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), while the Xeon E5-2692 v2 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-10400 targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400 rivals Ryzen 5 3600.