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: +53.5% higher average FPS across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+50% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i7-3940XM.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $160 MSRP, while Core i7-3940XM mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-3940XM can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i7-3940XM

2012

Why buy it

✅Draws 55W instead of 65W, a 10W reduction.
✅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 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (5,957 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 i7-3940XM

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +53.5% higher average FPS across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+50% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i7-3940XM.

Why buy it

✅Draws 55W instead of 65W, a 10W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 4000, while Core i5-10400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $160 MSRP, while Core i7-3940XM mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-3940XM can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (5,957 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 i7-3940XM?

Yes. Core i5-10400F is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 53.5% average FPS lead across 2 shared CPU game tests in our data, 118.7% 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 53.5% more average FPS across 2 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 118.7% 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 $160 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it gives you a 53.5% average FPS lead across 2 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 2012), 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 i7-3940XM Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-3940XM
1080p
low	192 FPS	149 FPS
medium	152 FPS	147 FPS
high	123 FPS	116 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	93 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	147 FPS
medium	119 FPS	123 FPS
high	97 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	76 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	69 FPS
medium	70 FPS	62 FPS
high	55 FPS	48 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	38 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i7-3940XM

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-3940XM
1080p
low	326 FPS	149 FPS
medium	318 FPS	149 FPS
high	290 FPS	149 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	137 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	149 FPS
medium	292 FPS	149 FPS
high	267 FPS	149 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	122 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	149 FPS
medium	258 FPS	133 FPS
high	235 FPS	110 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	83 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i7-3940XM

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-3940XM
1080p
low	326 FPS	149 FPS
medium	326 FPS	149 FPS
high	326 FPS	149 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	149 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	149 FPS
medium	326 FPS	149 FPS
high	326 FPS	149 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	149 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	149 FPS
medium	326 FPS	149 FPS
high	289 FPS	149 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	149 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i7-3940XM

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-3940XM
1080p
low	326 FPS	149 FPS
medium	326 FPS	149 FPS
high	326 FPS	149 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	149 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	149 FPS
medium	326 FPS	149 FPS
high	326 FPS	149 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	149 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	149 FPS
medium	326 FPS	149 FPS
high	326 FPS	149 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	149 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i7-3940XM

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Core i7-3940XM

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 i7-3940XM

The Core i7-3940XM is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 September 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 GHz, with boost up to 3.9 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 5,957 points. Launch price was $1,096.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core i7-3940XM 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 i7-3940XM — a 9.8% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i7-3940XM uses Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Core i7-3940XM's 5,957 — a 74.5% lead for the Core i5-10400F. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 720, a 67.5% lead for the Core i5-10400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 8 MB (total) on the Core i7-3940XM.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-3940XM
Cores / Threads	6 / 12+50%	4 / 8
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+10%	3.9 GHz
Base Clock	2.9 GHz	3 GHz+3%
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)+50%	8 MB (total)
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256K (per core)
Process	14 nm-36%	22 nm
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
PassMark	13,029+119%	5,957
Cinebench R23 Multi	8,191	—
Geekbench 6 Single	1,454+102%	720
Geekbench 6 Multi	5,783	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i7-3940XM uses PGA988 (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 i7-3940XM — 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 HM75,HM76,HM77,QM77,QS77 (Core i7-3940XM).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-3940XM
Socket	LGA1200	PGA988
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

Only the Core i7-3940XM has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i7-3940XM). The Core i7-3940XM includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 4000), while the Core i5-10400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, Core i7-3940XM targets Extreme Performance Laptop. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; Core i7-3940XM rivals A10-5750M.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-3940XM
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	HD Graphics 4000
Unlocked	No	Yes
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	Gaming	Extreme Performance Laptop