
Core i5-10400F
Popular choices:

Core i7-3770S
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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.
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
2020Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +93.3% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+50% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB).
- ✅Costs $90 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $250 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 229.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 24.7 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $250 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-3770S can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Core i7-3770S
2012Why buy it
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 4000, while Core i5-10400F needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (4,500 vs 8,191).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 12 MB).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 24.7 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($250 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
Core i5-10400F
2020Core i7-3770S
2012Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +93.3% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+50% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB).
- ✅Costs $90 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $250 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 229.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 24.7 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $250 MSRP).
Why buy it
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 4000, while Core i5-10400F needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-3770S can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (4,500 vs 8,191).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 12 MB).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 24.7 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($250 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
Quick Answers
So, is Core i5-10400F better than Core i7-3770S?
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?
Games Benchmarks
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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Core i7-3770S |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 192 FPS | 154 FPS |
| medium | 152 FPS | 140 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 111 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 89 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 142 FPS |
| medium | 119 FPS | 118 FPS |
| high | 97 FPS | 92 FPS |
| ultra | 79 FPS | 73 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 65 FPS |
| medium | 70 FPS | 57 FPS |
| high | 55 FPS | 45 FPS |
| ultra | 43 FPS | 35 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Core i7-3770S |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 154 FPS |
| medium | 318 FPS | 154 FPS |
| high | 290 FPS | 154 FPS |
| ultra | 253 FPS | 123 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 154 FPS |
| medium | 292 FPS | 149 FPS |
| high | 267 FPS | 137 FPS |
| ultra | 234 FPS | 111 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 309 FPS | 133 FPS |
| medium | 258 FPS | 121 FPS |
| high | 235 FPS | 100 FPS |
| ultra | 199 FPS | 75 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Core i7-3770S |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 154 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 154 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 154 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 154 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 154 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 154 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 154 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 154 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 154 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 154 FPS |
| high | 289 FPS | 154 FPS |
| ultra | 229 FPS | 154 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Core i7-3770S |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 154 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 154 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 154 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 154 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 154 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 154 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 154 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 154 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 154 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 154 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 154 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 154 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Core i7-3770S

Core i5-10400F
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 i7-3770S
Core i7-3770S
The Core i7-3770S is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 29 April 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.9 GHz. L3 cache: 8192 kB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1155. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 6,173 points. Launch price was $330.
Processing Power
The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core i7-3770S 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 3.9 GHz on the Core i7-3770S — a 9.8% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.1 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i7-3770S uses Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Core i7-3770S's 6,173 — a 71.4% lead for the Core i5-10400F. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 8,191 vs 4,500 (58.2% advantage for the Core i5-10400F). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 694, a 70.8% lead for the Core i5-10400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 5,783 vs 2,303 (86.1% advantage for the Core i5-10400F). L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 8192 kB (total) on the Core i7-3770S.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core i7-3770S |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12+50% | 4 / 8 |
| Boost Clock | 4.3 GHz+10% | 3.9 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.9 GHz | 3.1 GHz+7% |
| L3 Cache | 12 MB (total)+50% | 8192 kB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 256 kB (per core) |
| Process | 14 nm-36% | 22 nm |
| Architecture | Comet Lake (2020−2025) | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) |
| PassMark | 13,029+111% | 6,173 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 8,191+82% | 4,500 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,454+110% | 694 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 5,783+151% | 2,303 |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i7-3770S uses LGA1155 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus DDR3-1600 on the Core i7-3770S — the Core i5-10400F supports 28.6% 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 — 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 Z77,H77,B75,Z68,P67,H67 (Core i7-3770S).
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core i7-3770S |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1200 | LGA1155 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666+33% | DDR3-1600 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB+300% | 32 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | No | No |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. The Core i7-3770S includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 4000), while the Core i5-10400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, Core i7-3770S targets Budget. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core i7-3770S |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | HD Graphics 4000 |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d |
| Target Use | Gaming | Budget |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Core i7-3770S debuted at $250. On MSRP ($160 vs $250), the Core i5-10400F is $90 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 24.7 pts/$ for the Core i7-3770S — making the Core i5-10400F the 106.9% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core i7-3770S |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $160-36% | $250 |
| Performance per Dollar | 81.4+230% | 24.7 |
| Release Date | 2020 | 2012 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












