
Core i5-10400F
Popular choices:

Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition
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: +20.9% higher average FPS across 31 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $830 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $990 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 547.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 12.6 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $990 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 130W, a 65W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition.
Trade-offs
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 15 MB).
Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition
2011Why buy it
- ✅+25% larger total L3 cache (15 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅150% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 31 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (12,460 vs 13,029).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.6 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($990 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ❌100% higher power demand at 130W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Core i5-10400F
2020Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition
2011Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +20.9% higher average FPS across 31 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $830 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $990 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 547.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 12.6 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $990 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 130W, a 65W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition.
Why buy it
- ✅+25% larger total L3 cache (15 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅150% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 15 MB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 31 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (12,460 vs 13,029).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.6 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($990 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ❌100% higher power demand at 130W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i5-10400F better than Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition?
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 i7-3960X Extreme Edition |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 192 FPS | 164 FPS |
| medium | 152 FPS | 141 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 112 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 90 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 139 FPS |
| medium | 119 FPS | 117 FPS |
| high | 97 FPS | 91 FPS |
| ultra | 79 FPS | 72 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 63 FPS |
| medium | 70 FPS | 57 FPS |
| high | 55 FPS | 44 FPS |
| ultra | 43 FPS | 35 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 201 FPS |
| medium | 318 FPS | 176 FPS |
| high | 290 FPS | 161 FPS |
| ultra | 253 FPS | 126 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 178 FPS |
| medium | 292 FPS | 155 FPS |
| high | 267 FPS | 143 FPS |
| ultra | 234 FPS | 114 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 309 FPS | 139 FPS |
| medium | 258 FPS | 123 FPS |
| high | 235 FPS | 105 FPS |
| ultra | 199 FPS | 75 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 312 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 312 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 312 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 312 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 312 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 312 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 312 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 292 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 312 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 274 FPS |
| high | 289 FPS | 238 FPS |
| ultra | 229 FPS | 192 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 312 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 312 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 312 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 312 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 312 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 312 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 312 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 312 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 312 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 312 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 312 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 312 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition

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 i7-3960X Extreme Edition
Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition
The Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 14 November 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Max frequency: 3.3 GHz. L3 cache: 15 MB. L2 cache: 1,536 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Thermal design power (TDP): 130 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 12,460 points. Launch price was $149.
Processing Power
Both the Core i5-10400F and Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition share an identical 6-core/12-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 3.3 GHz on the Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition — a 26.3% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F. The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition's 12,460 — a 4.5% lead for the Core i5-10400F. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 800, a 58% lead for the Core i5-10400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 15 MB on the Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 6 / 12 |
| Boost Clock | 4.3 GHz+30% | 3.3 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.9 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 12 MB (total) | 15 MB+25% |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 1,536 kB+500% |
| Process | 14 nm-56% | 32 nm |
| Architecture | Comet Lake (2020−2025) | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) |
| PassMark | 13,029+5% | 12,460 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 8,191 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,454+82% | 800 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 5,783 | — |
Memory & Platform
Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus DDR3-1600 on the Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition — 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 64 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-10400F) vs 4 (Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 40 (Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition) — the Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition offers 24 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and X79 (Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition).
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1200 | — |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0+50% | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666+33% | DDR3-1600 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB+100% | 64 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 4+100% |
| ECC Support | No | No |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 40+150% |
Advanced Features
Only the Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition 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 i7-3960X Extreme Edition). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition targets HEDT Desktop. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition rivals FX-8350.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | — | None |
| Unlocked | No | Yes |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d, EPT |
| Target Use | Gaming | HEDT Desktop |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition debuted at $990. On MSRP ($160 vs $990), the Core i5-10400F is $830 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 12.6 pts/$ for the Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition — making the Core i5-10400F the 146.5% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $160-84% | $990 |
| Performance per Dollar | 81.4+546% | 12.6 |
| Release Date | 2020 | 2011 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












