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 $430 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $590 MSRP).
✅Delivers 17.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 69.5 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $590 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i9-13950HX.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-13950HX across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 41,012).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 36 MB).
❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core i9-13950HX moves to FCBGA1964 and DDR5.

Core i9-13950HX

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +68.5% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+200% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Draws 55W instead of 65W, a 10W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA1964 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
✅25% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 69.5 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($590 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Core i9-13950HX

2023

Why buy it

✅Costs $430 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $590 MSRP).
✅Delivers 17.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 69.5 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $590 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i9-13950HX.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +68.5% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+200% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Draws 55W instead of 65W, a 10W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA1964 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
✅25% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-13950HX across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 41,012).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 36 MB).
❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core i9-13950HX moves to FCBGA1964 and DDR5.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 69.5 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($590 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i9-13950HX better than Core i5-10400F?

Yes. Core i9-13950HX is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 68.5% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data, 214.8% 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 i9-13950HX is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 68.5% 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 i9-13950HX is the better fit. You are getting 214.8% better PassMark, backed by 24 cores and 32 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 200% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 12 MB).

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

Core i9-13950HX is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-10400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Core i9-13950HX is 268.8% more expensive on MSRP at $590 MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you a 68.5% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-10400F is also 17.1% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 69.5 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core i9-13950HX is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2023 vs 2020), a healthier platform with FCBGA1964 and DDR5 instead of LGA1200, 200% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 12 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 24 cores / 32 threads instead of 6/12. That should give you a better long-term upgrade path for motherboard, RAM, and future CPU swaps.

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 i9-13950HX Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-13950HX
1080p
low	192 FPS	321 FPS
medium	152 FPS	311 FPS
high	123 FPS	247 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	209 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	278 FPS
medium	119 FPS	240 FPS
high	97 FPS	178 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	158 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	192 FPS
medium	70 FPS	164 FPS
high	55 FPS	123 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	112 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i9-13950HX

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-13950HX
1080p
low	326 FPS	497 FPS
medium	318 FPS	434 FPS
high	290 FPS	354 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	313 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	422 FPS
medium	292 FPS	380 FPS
high	267 FPS	316 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	257 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	236 FPS
medium	258 FPS	216 FPS
high	235 FPS	205 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	179 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i9-13950HX

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-13950HX
1080p
low	326 FPS	762 FPS
medium	326 FPS	626 FPS
high	326 FPS	543 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	467 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	680 FPS
medium	326 FPS	567 FPS
high	326 FPS	485 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	423 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	497 FPS
medium	326 FPS	430 FPS
high	289 FPS	383 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	329 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i9-13950HX

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-13950HX
1080p
low	326 FPS	1010 FPS
medium	326 FPS	905 FPS
high	326 FPS	792 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	704 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	838 FPS
medium	326 FPS	739 FPS
high	326 FPS	646 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	568 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	619 FPS
medium	326 FPS	555 FPS
high	326 FPS	491 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	430 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i9-13950HX

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Core i9-13950HX

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 i9-13950HX

The Core i9-13950HX is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 January 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Raptor Lake-HX (2023) architecture. It features 24 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 5.5 GHz. L3 cache: 36 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1964. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR4, DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 41,012 points. Launch price was $590.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core i9-13950HX offers 24 cores / 32 threads — the Core i9-13950HX has 18 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5.5 GHz on the Core i9-13950HX — a 24.5% clock advantage for the Core i9-13950HX (base: 2.9 GHz vs 2.2 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i9-13950HX uses Raptor Lake-HX (2023) (Intel 7 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Core i9-13950HX's 41,012 — a 103.6% lead for the Core i9-13950HX. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 36 MB (total) on the Core i9-13950HX.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-13950HX
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	24 / 32+300%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz	5.5 GHz+28%
Base Clock	2.9 GHz+32%	2.2 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	36 MB (total)+200%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	2 MB (per core)+700%
Process	14 nm	Intel 7 nm-50%
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Raptor Lake-HX (2023)
PassMark	13,029	41,012+215%
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 i9-13950HX uses FCBGA1964 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus 5600 on the Core i9-13950HX — the Core i9-13950HX supports 199.7% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i9-13950HX supports up to 192 of RAM compared to 128 GB — 40% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 20 (Core i9-13950HX) — the Core i9-13950HX offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and Raptor Lake-HX (Core i9-13950HX).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-13950HX
Socket	LGA1200	FCBGA1964
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 5.0+67%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	5600+139900%
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB+69904967%	192
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	20+25%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Core i9-13950HX has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Core i9-13950HX supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. The Core i9-13950HX includes integrated graphics (Intel UHD Graphics), 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; Core i9-13950HX rivals M3 Max 16-Core.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-13950HX
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	Intel UHD Graphics
Unlocked	No	Yes
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	Gaming	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Core i9-13950HX debuted at $590. On MSRP ($160 vs $590), the Core i5-10400F is $430 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 69.5 pts/$ for the Core i9-13950HX — making the Core i5-10400F the 15.8% better value option.