
Core i5-10400F
Popular choices:

Core i7-4710MQ
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: +127.1% higher average FPS across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+100% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 6 MB).
- ✅Costs $218 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $378 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 431.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 15.3 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $378 MSRP).
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i7-4710MQ.
Trade-offs
- ❌38.3% higher power demand at 65W vs 47W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-4710MQ can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Core i7-4710MQ
2013Why buy it
- ✅Draws 47W instead of 65W, a 18W reduction.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics 4600, while Core i5-10400F needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (3,200 vs 5,783).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (6 MB vs 12 MB).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.3 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($378 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Core i5-10400F
2020Core i7-4710MQ
2013Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +127.1% higher average FPS across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+100% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 6 MB).
- ✅Costs $218 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $378 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 431.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 15.3 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $378 MSRP).
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i7-4710MQ.
Why buy it
- ✅Draws 47W instead of 65W, a 18W reduction.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics 4600, while Core i5-10400F needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌38.3% higher power demand at 65W vs 47W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-4710MQ can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (3,200 vs 5,783).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (6 MB vs 12 MB).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.3 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($378 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i5-10400F better than Core i7-4710MQ?
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 i7-4710MQ |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 192 FPS | 145 FPS |
| medium | 152 FPS | 139 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 109 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 88 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 140 FPS |
| medium | 119 FPS | 118 FPS |
| high | 97 FPS | 91 FPS |
| ultra | 79 FPS | 73 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 67 FPS |
| medium | 70 FPS | 61 FPS |
| high | 55 FPS | 47 FPS |
| ultra | 43 FPS | 37 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Core i7-4710MQ |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 145 FPS |
| medium | 318 FPS | 145 FPS |
| high | 290 FPS | 145 FPS |
| ultra | 253 FPS | 110 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 145 FPS |
| medium | 292 FPS | 134 FPS |
| high | 267 FPS | 125 FPS |
| ultra | 234 FPS | 99 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 309 FPS | 119 FPS |
| medium | 258 FPS | 108 FPS |
| high | 235 FPS | 86 FPS |
| ultra | 199 FPS | 63 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Core i7-4710MQ |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 145 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 145 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 145 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 145 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 145 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 145 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 145 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 145 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 145 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 145 FPS |
| high | 289 FPS | 145 FPS |
| ultra | 229 FPS | 145 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Core i7-4710MQ |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 145 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 145 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 145 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 145 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 145 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 145 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 145 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 145 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 145 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 145 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 145 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 145 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Core i7-4710MQ

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 i7-4710MQ
Core i7-4710MQ
The Core i7-4710MQ is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 27 May 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.5 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: PGA946. Thermal design power (TDP): 47 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 5,792 points. Launch price was $378.
Processing Power
The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core i7-4710MQ 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 i7-4710MQ — 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 i7-4710MQ uses Haswell (2013−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Core i7-4710MQ's 5,792 — a 76.9% lead for the Core i5-10400F. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 950, a 41.9% lead for the Core i5-10400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 5,783 vs 3,200 (57.5% advantage for the Core i5-10400F). L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 6 MB (total) on the Core i7-4710MQ.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core i7-4710MQ |
|---|---|---|
| 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)+100% | 6 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 256K (per core) |
| Process | 14 nm-36% | 22 nm |
| Architecture | Comet Lake (2020−2025) | Haswell (2013−2015) |
| PassMark | 13,029+125% | 5,792 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 8,191 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,454+53% | 950 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 5,783+81% | 3,200 |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i7-4710MQ uses PGA946 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus DDR3L-1600 on the Core i7-4710MQ — 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 HM86,HM87,QM87 (Core i7-4710MQ).
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core i7-4710MQ |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1200 | PGA946 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666+33% | DDR3L-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. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) vs VT-x, EPT (Core i7-4710MQ). The Core i7-4710MQ includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 4600), while the Core i5-10400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, Core i7-4710MQ targets Laptop. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core i7-4710MQ |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Intel HD Graphics 4600 |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, EPT |
| Target Use | Gaming | Laptop |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Core i7-4710MQ debuted at $378. On MSRP ($160 vs $378), the Core i5-10400F is $218 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 15.3 pts/$ for the Core i7-4710MQ — making the Core i5-10400F the 136.7% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core i7-4710MQ |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $160-58% | $378 |
| Performance per Dollar | 81.4+432% | 15.3 |
| Release Date | 2020 | 2013 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












