
Core i5-10400F
Popular choices:

Core i9-9990XE
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
- ✅Costs $1,840 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $2,000 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 440.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 15.1 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $2,000 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 255W, a 190W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i9-9990XE.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-9990XE across 22 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (5,783 vs 16,199).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 19 MB).
Core i9-9990XE
2019Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +54.7% higher average FPS across 22 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+60.4% larger total L3 cache (19 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅175% more PCIe lanes (44 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.1 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($2,000 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ❌292.3% higher power demand at 255W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Core i5-10400F
2020Core i9-9990XE
2019Why buy it
- ✅Costs $1,840 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $2,000 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 440.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 15.1 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $2,000 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 255W, a 190W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i9-9990XE.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +54.7% higher average FPS across 22 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+60.4% larger total L3 cache (19 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅175% more PCIe lanes (44 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-9990XE across 22 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (5,783 vs 16,199).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 19 MB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.1 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($2,000 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ❌292.3% higher power demand at 255W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i9-9990XE better than Core i5-10400F?
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 i9-9990XE |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 192 FPS | 328 FPS |
| medium | 152 FPS | 288 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 238 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 182 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 275 FPS |
| medium | 119 FPS | 220 FPS |
| high | 97 FPS | 178 FPS |
| ultra | 79 FPS | 142 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 172 FPS |
| medium | 70 FPS | 138 FPS |
| high | 55 FPS | 108 FPS |
| ultra | 43 FPS | 92 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Core i9-9990XE |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 634 FPS |
| medium | 318 FPS | 521 FPS |
| high | 290 FPS | 431 FPS |
| ultra | 253 FPS | 389 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 554 FPS |
| medium | 292 FPS | 475 FPS |
| high | 267 FPS | 394 FPS |
| ultra | 234 FPS | 338 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 309 FPS | 328 FPS |
| medium | 258 FPS | 286 FPS |
| high | 235 FPS | 267 FPS |
| ultra | 199 FPS | 232 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Core i9-9990XE |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 754 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 754 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 683 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 575 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 754 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 639 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 546 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 458 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 558 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 458 FPS |
| high | 289 FPS | 411 FPS |
| ultra | 229 FPS | 342 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Core i9-9990XE |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 754 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 754 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 754 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 754 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 754 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 754 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 746 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 656 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 665 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 591 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 526 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 437 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Core i9-9990XE

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 i9-9990XE
Core i9-9990XE
The Core i9-9990XE is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 19 October 2018 (7 years ago). It is based on the Skylake (server) (2017−2018) architecture. It features 14 cores and 28 threads. Base frequency is 4 GHz, with boost up to 5.1 GHz. L3 cache: 19.25 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2066. Thermal design power (TDP): 255 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Quad-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 30,162 points. Launch price was $2,800.
Processing Power
The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core i9-9990XE offers 14 cores / 28 threads — the Core i9-9990XE has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5.1 GHz on the Core i9-9990XE — a 17% clock advantage for the Core i9-9990XE (base: 2.9 GHz vs 4 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i9-9990XE uses Skylake (server) (2017−2018) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Core i9-9990XE's 30,162 — a 79.3% lead for the Core i9-9990XE. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 1,392, a 4.4% lead for the Core i5-10400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 5,783 vs 16,199 (94.8% advantage for the Core i9-9990XE). L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 19.25 MB (total) on the Core i9-9990XE.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core i9-9990XE |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 14 / 28+133% |
| Boost Clock | 4.3 GHz | 5.1 GHz+19% |
| Base Clock | 2.9 GHz | 4 GHz+38% |
| L3 Cache | 12 MB (total) | 19.25 MB (total)+60% |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 1 MB (per core)+300% |
| Process | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Architecture | Comet Lake (2020−2025) | Skylake (server) (2017−2018) |
| PassMark | 13,029 | 30,162+131% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 8,191 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,454+4% | 1,392 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 5,783 | 16,199+180% |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i9-9990XE uses LGA2066 (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. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-10400F) vs 4 (Core i9-9990XE). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 44 (Core i9-9990XE) — the Core i9-9990XE offers 28 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and X299 (Core i9-9990XE).
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core i9-9990XE |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1200 | LGA2066 |
| 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 | 4+100% |
| ECC Support | No | No |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 44+175% |
Advanced Features
Only the Core i9-9990XE has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Core i9-9990XE supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, Core i9-9990XE targets HEDT. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; Core i9-9990XE rivals Threadripper 2970WX.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core i9-9990XE |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | No | Yes |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d |
| Target Use | Gaming | HEDT |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Core i9-9990XE debuted at $2000. On MSRP ($160 vs $2000), the Core i5-10400F is $1840 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 15.1 pts/$ for the Core i9-9990XE — making the Core i5-10400F the 137.5% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core i9-9990XE |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $160-92% | $2000 |
| Performance per Dollar | 81.4+439% | 15.1 |
| Release Date | 2020 | 2019 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












