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: +48.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $830 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $990 MSRP).
✅Delivers 842.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 8.6 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $990 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 150W, a 85W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i7-3970X.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 15 MB).

Core i7-3970X

2012

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

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (8,554 vs 13,029).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 8.6 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($990 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌130.8% higher power demand at 150W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Core i7-3970X

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +48.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $830 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $990 MSRP).
✅Delivers 842.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 8.6 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $990 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 150W, a 85W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i7-3970X.

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 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (8,554 vs 13,029).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 8.6 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($990 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌130.8% higher power demand at 150W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-10400F better than Core i7-3970X?

Yes. Core i5-10400F is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 48.9% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data, 52.3% 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 48.9% 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 52.3% better PassMark, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads.

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

Core i5-10400F is the smarter buy today. Core i5-10400F is $830 cheaper on MSRP at $160 MSRP versus $990 MSRP, and it gives you a 48.9% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 842.4% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 8.6 PassMark/$), 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) 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 i7-3970X Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-3970X
1080p
low	192 FPS	169 FPS
medium	152 FPS	144 FPS
high	123 FPS	116 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	96 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	141 FPS
medium	119 FPS	119 FPS
high	97 FPS	93 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	76 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	64 FPS
medium	70 FPS	57 FPS
high	55 FPS	45 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	36 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i7-3970X

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-3970X
1080p
low	326 FPS	214 FPS
medium	318 FPS	206 FPS
high	290 FPS	186 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	151 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	209 FPS
medium	292 FPS	181 FPS
high	267 FPS	164 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	136 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	164 FPS
medium	258 FPS	144 FPS
high	235 FPS	128 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	95 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i7-3970X

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-3970X
1080p
low	326 FPS	214 FPS
medium	326 FPS	214 FPS
high	326 FPS	214 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	214 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	214 FPS
medium	326 FPS	214 FPS
high	326 FPS	214 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	214 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	214 FPS
medium	326 FPS	214 FPS
high	289 FPS	214 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	214 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i7-3970X

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-3970X
1080p
low	326 FPS	214 FPS
medium	326 FPS	214 FPS
high	326 FPS	214 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	214 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	214 FPS
medium	326 FPS	214 FPS
high	326 FPS	214 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	214 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	214 FPS
medium	326 FPS	214 FPS
high	326 FPS	214 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	214 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i7-3970X

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Core i7-3970X

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 i7-3970X

The Core i7-3970X is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 November 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge-E (2011−2013) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 15 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 150 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 8,554 points. Launch price was $593.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core i5-10400F and Core i7-3970X share an identical 6-core/12-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 4 GHz on the Core i7-3970X — a 7.2% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.5 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i7-3970X uses Sandy Bridge-E (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Core i7-3970X's 8,554 — a 41.5% lead for the Core i5-10400F. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 742, a 64.8% 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 (total) on the Core i7-3970X.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-3970X
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	6 / 12
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+7%	4 GHz
Base Clock	2.9 GHz	3.5 GHz+21%
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	15 MB (total)+25%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Sandy Bridge-E (2011−2013)
PassMark	13,029+52%	8,554
Cinebench R23 Multi	8,191	—
Geekbench 6 Single	1,454+96%	742
Geekbench 6 Multi	5,783	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i7-3970X uses LGA2011 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus DDR3-1600 on the Core i7-3970X — 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 i7-3970X). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 40 (Core i7-3970X) — the Core i7-3970X 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 i7-3970X).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-3970X
Socket	LGA1200	LGA2011
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 i7-3970X 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 i7-3970X). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, Core i7-3970X targets HEDT Desktop. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; Core i7-3970X rivals FX-9590.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-3970X
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 i7-3970X 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 8.6 pts/$ for the Core i7-3970X — making the Core i5-10400F the 161.6% better value option.