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: +145.7% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+50% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i7-2920XM.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $160 MSRP, while Core i7-2920XM mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-2920XM can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i7-2920XM

2011

Why buy it

✅Draws 55W instead of 65W, a 10W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics 3000, while Core i5-10400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (4,336 vs 13,029).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 12 MB).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Core i7-2920XM

2011

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +145.7% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+50% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i7-2920XM.

Why buy it

✅Draws 55W instead of 65W, a 10W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics 3000, while Core i5-10400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $160 MSRP, while Core i7-2920XM mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-2920XM can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (4,336 vs 13,029).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 12 MB).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-10400F better than Core i7-2920XM?

Yes. Core i5-10400F is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 145.7% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data, 200.5% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i5-10400F is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 145.7% more average FPS across 4 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 better fit. You are getting 200.5% better PassMark, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 50% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB).

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

Core i5-10400F is the smarter buy today. Core i5-10400F is at an unclear MSRP at $160 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it gives you a 145.7% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

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

Core i5-10400F is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2020 vs 2011), 50% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 6 cores / 12 threads instead of 4/8. 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 i7-2920XM Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-2920XM
1080p
low	192 FPS	108 FPS
medium	152 FPS	108 FPS
high	123 FPS	108 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	89 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	108 FPS
medium	119 FPS	108 FPS
high	97 FPS	90 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	73 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	66 FPS
medium	70 FPS	60 FPS
high	55 FPS	46 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	36 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i7-2920XM

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-2920XM
1080p
low	326 FPS	108 FPS
medium	318 FPS	108 FPS
high	290 FPS	108 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	104 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	108 FPS
medium	292 FPS	108 FPS
high	267 FPS	108 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	93 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	108 FPS
medium	258 FPS	97 FPS
high	235 FPS	75 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	53 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i7-2920XM

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-2920XM
1080p
low	326 FPS	108 FPS
medium	326 FPS	108 FPS
high	326 FPS	108 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	108 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	108 FPS
medium	326 FPS	108 FPS
high	326 FPS	108 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	108 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	108 FPS
medium	326 FPS	108 FPS
high	289 FPS	108 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	108 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i7-2920XM

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-2920XM
1080p
low	326 FPS	108 FPS
medium	326 FPS	108 FPS
high	326 FPS	108 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	108 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	108 FPS
medium	326 FPS	108 FPS
high	326 FPS	108 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	108 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	108 FPS
medium	326 FPS	108 FPS
high	326 FPS	108 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	108 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i7-2920XM

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Core i7-2920XM

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 i7-2920XM

The Core i7-2920XM is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 January 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.5 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 4,336 points. Launch price was $1,096.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core i7-2920XM offers 4 cores / 8 threads — the Core i5-10400F has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 3.5 GHz on the Core i7-2920XM — a 20.5% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.9 GHz vs 2.5 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i7-2920XM uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Core i7-2920XM's 4,336 — a 100.1% lead for the Core i5-10400F. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 8 MB (total) on the Core i7-2920XM.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-2920XM
Cores / Threads	6 / 12+50%	4 / 8
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+23%	3.5 GHz
Base Clock	2.9 GHz+16%	2.5 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)+50%	8 MB (total)
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256K (per core)
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
PassMark	13,029+200%	4,336
Cinebench R23 Multi	8,191	—
Geekbench 6 Single	1,454	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	5,783	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i7-2920XM uses PGA988 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus 1600 on the Core i7-2920XM — the Core i7-2920XM supports 199% 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 — 120% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and HM65,HM67,QM67,QS67 (Core i7-2920XM).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-2920XM
Socket	LGA1200	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	1600+39900%
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB+419430300%	32
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Core i7-2920XM has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) vs true (Core i7-2920XM). The Core i7-2920XM includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 3000), while the Core i5-10400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; Core i7-2920XM rivals Core i7-2820QM.