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

✅Costs $199 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $359 MSRP).
✅Delivers 115.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 37.8 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $359 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 95W, a 30W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i7-8700K.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-8700K across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 13,572).
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-8700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i7-8700K

2017

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +5.1% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel UHD Graphics 630, while Core i5-10400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 37.8 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($359 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌46.2% higher power demand at 95W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Core i7-8700K

2017

Why buy it

✅Costs $199 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $359 MSRP).
✅Delivers 115.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 37.8 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $359 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 95W, a 30W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i7-8700K.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +5.1% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel UHD Graphics 630, while Core i5-10400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-8700K across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 13,572).
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-8700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 37.8 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($359 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌46.2% higher power demand at 95W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-8700K better than Core i5-10400F?

Yes. Core i7-8700K is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 5.1% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data and 4.2% better PassMark, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i7-8700K is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 5.1% 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 i7-8700K is the better fit. You are getting 4.2% better PassMark, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads.

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

Core i7-8700K is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-10400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Core i7-8700K is 124.4% more expensive on MSRP at $359 MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you a 5.1% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-10400F is also 115.4% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 37.8 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper. That said, if you already own a compatible LGA1200 + DDR4 setup, Core i5-10400F can still make sense as a platform-matched option because it avoids a motherboard and RAM swap.

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 2017). That makes it the safer long-term pick.

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 i7-8700K Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-8700K
1080p
low	192 FPS	214 FPS
medium	152 FPS	173 FPS
high	123 FPS	140 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	103 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	181 FPS
medium	119 FPS	145 FPS
high	97 FPS	116 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	86 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	92 FPS
medium	70 FPS	79 FPS
high	55 FPS	62 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	48 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i7-8700K

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-8700K
1080p
low	326 FPS	339 FPS
medium	318 FPS	339 FPS
high	290 FPS	321 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	275 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	339 FPS
medium	292 FPS	326 FPS
high	267 FPS	292 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	250 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	331 FPS
medium	258 FPS	276 FPS
high	235 FPS	248 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	204 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i7-8700K

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-8700K
1080p
low	326 FPS	339 FPS
medium	326 FPS	339 FPS
high	326 FPS	339 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	339 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	339 FPS
medium	326 FPS	339 FPS
high	326 FPS	339 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	339 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	339 FPS
medium	326 FPS	339 FPS
high	289 FPS	339 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	303 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i7-8700K

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-8700K
1080p
low	326 FPS	339 FPS
medium	326 FPS	339 FPS
high	326 FPS	339 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	339 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	339 FPS
medium	326 FPS	339 FPS
high	326 FPS	339 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	339 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	339 FPS
medium	326 FPS	339 FPS
high	326 FPS	339 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	339 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i7-8700K

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Core i7-8700K

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 i7-8700K

The Core i7-8700K is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 5 October 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Coffee Lake-S (2017−2018) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 4.7 GHz. L3 cache: 12288 kB. L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 13,572 points. Launch price was $359.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core i5-10400F and Core i7-8700K share an identical 6-core/12-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 4.7 GHz on the Core i7-8700K — a 8.9% clock advantage for the Core i7-8700K (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.7 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i7-8700K uses Coffee Lake-S (2017−2018) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Core i7-8700K's 13,572 — a 4.1% lead for the Core i7-8700K. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 12288 kB on the Core i7-8700K.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-8700K
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	6 / 12
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz	4.7 GHz+9%
Base Clock	2.9 GHz	3.7 GHz+28%
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	12288 kB
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256K (per core)
Process	14 nm	14 nm
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Coffee Lake-S (2017−2018)
PassMark	13,029	13,572+4%
Cinebench R23 Multi	8,191	—
Geekbench 6 Single	1,454	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	5,783	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i7-8700K uses LGA1151 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR4-2666 memory speed. Both support up to 128 GB of RAM. 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 Intel 300 series (Core i7-8700K).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-8700K
Socket	LGA1200	LGA1151
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	DDR4-2666
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	128 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) / not specified (Core i7-8700K). The Core i7-8700K includes integrated graphics (Intel UHD Graphics 630), while the Core i5-10400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i7-8700K
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	Intel UHD Graphics 630
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	—
Target Use	Gaming	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Core i7-8700K debuted at $359. On MSRP ($160 vs $359), the Core i5-10400F is $199 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 37.8 pts/$ for the Core i7-8700K — making the Core i5-10400F the 73.2% better value option.