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.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +7.0% higher average FPS across 31 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $102 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $262 MSRP).
✅Delivers 47.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 55.1 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $262 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (5,783 vs 6,455).
❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i5-11600T can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i5-11600T

2021

Why buy it

✅+11.6% higher Geekbench multi-core.
✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.
✅25% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD 750, while Core i5-10400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 31 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 55.1 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($262 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).

Core i5-10400F

2020

Core i5-11600T

2021

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +7.0% higher average FPS across 31 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $102 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $262 MSRP).
✅Delivers 47.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 55.1 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $262 MSRP).

Why buy it

✅+11.6% higher Geekbench multi-core.
✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.
✅25% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD 750, while Core i5-10400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (5,783 vs 6,455).
❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i5-11600T can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 31 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 55.1 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($262 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-11600T better than Core i5-10400F?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, Core i5-10400F is ahead with a 7.0% average FPS lead across 31 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i5-11600T pulls ahead with 11.6% better Geekbench multi-core.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i5-11600T is the better fit. You are getting 11.6% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads.

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

Core i5-11600T is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-10400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Core i5-11600T is 63.7% more expensive on MSRP at $262 MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you 11.6% better Geekbench multi-core. The trade-off is that Core i5-10400F is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 7.0% average FPS lead across 31 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-10400F is also 47.7% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 55.1 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core i5-11600T is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2021 vs 2020) and more multi-core headroom with 6 cores / 12 threads instead of 6/12. That extra compute headroom should age better as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Core i5-10400F Benchmark Check

Core i5-11600T Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i5-11600T
1080p
low	192 FPS	188 FPS
medium	152 FPS	150 FPS
high	123 FPS	122 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	97 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	149 FPS
medium	119 FPS	117 FPS
high	97 FPS	94 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	75 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	70 FPS
medium	70 FPS	59 FPS
high	55 FPS	47 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	37 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i5-11600T

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i5-11600T
1080p
low	326 FPS	185 FPS
medium	318 FPS	158 FPS
high	290 FPS	149 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	130 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	170 FPS
medium	292 FPS	145 FPS
high	267 FPS	137 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	121 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	149 FPS
medium	258 FPS	128 FPS
high	235 FPS	121 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	103 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i5-11600T

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i5-11600T
1080p
low	326 FPS	361 FPS
medium	326 FPS	361 FPS
high	326 FPS	361 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	361 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	361 FPS
medium	326 FPS	361 FPS
high	326 FPS	361 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	361 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	361 FPS
medium	326 FPS	332 FPS
high	289 FPS	282 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	225 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i5-11600T

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i5-11600T
1080p
low	326 FPS	361 FPS
medium	326 FPS	361 FPS
high	326 FPS	361 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	361 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	361 FPS
medium	326 FPS	361 FPS
high	326 FPS	361 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	361 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	361 FPS
medium	326 FPS	361 FPS
high	326 FPS	361 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	347 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i5-11600T

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Core i5-11600T

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.

Core i5-11600T

The Core i5-11600T is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 16 March 2021 (4 years ago). It is based on the Rocket Lake (2021) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 1.7 GHz, with boost up to 4.1 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1200. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 14,447 points. Launch price was $149.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core i5-10400F and Core i5-11600T share an identical 6-core/12-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 4.1 GHz on the Core i5-11600T — a 4.8% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.9 GHz vs 1.7 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i5-11600T uses Rocket Lake (2021) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Core i5-11600T's 14,447 — a 10.3% lead for the Core i5-11600T. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 1,856, a 24.3% lead for the Core i5-11600T that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 5,783 vs 6,455 (11% advantage for the Core i5-11600T). Both processors carry 12 MB (total) of L3 cache.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i5-11600T
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	6 / 12
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+5%	4.1 GHz
Base Clock	2.9 GHz+71%	1.7 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	12 MB (total)
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256K (per core)
Process	14 nm	14 nm
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Rocket Lake (2021)
PassMark	13,029	14,447+11%
Cinebench R23 Multi	8,191	—
Geekbench 6 Single	1,454	1,856+28%
Geekbench 6 Multi	5,783	6,455+12%

🧠

Memory & Platform

Both processors use the LGA1200 socket with PCIe 3.0. Both support up to DDR4-2666 memory speed. Both support up to 128 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 20 (Core i5-11600T) — the Core i5-11600T offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and H470,Z490,B560,Z590 (Core i5-11600T).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i5-11600T
Socket	LGA1200	LGA1200
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 4.0+33%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	DDR4-3200
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	128 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	20+25%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the Core i5-11600T supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. The Core i5-11600T includes integrated graphics (UHD 750), while the Core i5-10400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, Core i5-11600T targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; Core i5-11600T rivals Ryzen 5 5600G.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i5-11600T
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	UHD 750
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	Gaming	Gaming

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Core i5-11600T debuted at $262. On MSRP ($160 vs $262), the Core i5-10400F is $102 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 55.1 pts/$ for the Core i5-11600T — making the Core i5-10400F the 38.5% better value option.