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 $97 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $257 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core Ultra 5 235.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 5 235 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (5,783 vs 13,000).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 24 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 81.4 vs 155.3 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $257 MSRP).
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 5 235 moves to LGA1851 and DDR5.

Core Ultra 5 235

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +82.8% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (24 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Delivers 90.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 155.3 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($257 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
✅Newer platform on LGA1851 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
✅25% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌
60.6% HIGHER MSRP
$257 MSRPvs$160 MSRP
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Core Ultra 5 235

2025

Why buy it

✅Costs $97 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $257 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core Ultra 5 235.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +82.8% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (24 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Delivers 90.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 155.3 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($257 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
✅Newer platform on LGA1851 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 Ultra 5 235 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (5,783 vs 13,000).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 24 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 81.4 vs 155.3 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $257 MSRP).
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 5 235 moves to LGA1851 and DDR5.

Trade-offs

❌
60.6% HIGHER MSRP
$257 MSRPvs$160 MSRP
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 5 235 better than Core i5-10400F?

Yes. Core Ultra 5 235 is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 82.8% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data, 124.8% better Geekbench multi-core, 206.4% higher 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 Ultra 5 235 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 82.8% 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 Ultra 5 235 is the better fit. You are getting 124.8% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 14 cores and 14 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (24 MB vs 12 MB).

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

Core Ultra 5 235 is the smarter buy today. Core Ultra 5 235 is 60.6% more expensive on MSRP at $257 MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you a 82.8% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 90.8% better value on MSRP (155.3 vs 81.4 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play 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 Ultra 5 235 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2020), a healthier platform with LGA1851 and DDR5 instead of LGA1200, 100% larger total L3 cache (24 MB vs 12 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 14 cores / 14 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 Ultra 5 235 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 5 235
1080p
low	192 FPS	278 FPS
medium	152 FPS	263 FPS
high	123 FPS	222 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	189 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	230 FPS
medium	119 FPS	194 FPS
high	97 FPS	158 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	137 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	152 FPS
medium	70 FPS	128 FPS
high	55 FPS	99 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	87 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core Ultra 5 235

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 5 235
1080p
low	326 FPS	663 FPS
medium	318 FPS	562 FPS
high	290 FPS	467 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	427 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	574 FPS
medium	292 FPS	509 FPS
high	267 FPS	426 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	369 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	342 FPS
medium	258 FPS	306 FPS
high	235 FPS	291 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	256 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core Ultra 5 235

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 5 235
1080p
low	326 FPS	839 FPS
medium	326 FPS	681 FPS
high	326 FPS	610 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	522 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	727 FPS
medium	326 FPS	590 FPS
high	326 FPS	516 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	441 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	504 FPS
medium	326 FPS	422 FPS
high	289 FPS	377 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	318 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core Ultra 5 235

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 5 235
1080p
low	326 FPS	989 FPS
medium	326 FPS	891 FPS
high	326 FPS	778 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	699 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	810 FPS
medium	326 FPS	717 FPS
high	326 FPS	624 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	548 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	567 FPS
medium	326 FPS	512 FPS
high	326 FPS	459 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	404 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core Ultra 5 235

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Core Ultra 5 235

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 Ultra 5 235

The Core Ultra 5 235 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 7 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) architecture. It features 14 cores and 14 threads. Base frequency is 3.4 GHz, with boost up to 5 GHz. L3 cache: 24 MB (total). L2 cache: 3 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1851. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 39,924 points. Launch price was $257.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 235 offers 14 cores / 14 threads — the Core Ultra 5 235 has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5 GHz on the Core Ultra 5 235 — a 15.1% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 5 235 (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.4 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Core Ultra 5 235 uses Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) (3 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Core Ultra 5 235's 39,924 — a 101.6% lead for the Core Ultra 5 235. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 2,600, a 56.5% lead for the Core Ultra 5 235 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 5,783 vs 13,000 (76.8% advantage for the Core Ultra 5 235). L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 24 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 5 235.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 5 235
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	14 / 14+133%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz	5 GHz+16%
Base Clock	2.9 GHz	3.4 GHz+17%
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	24 MB (total)+100%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	3 MB (per core)+1100%
Process	14 nm	3 nm-79%
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)
PassMark	13,029	39,924+206%
Cinebench R23 Multi	8,191	—
Geekbench 6 Single	1,454	2,600+79%
Geekbench 6 Multi	5,783	13,000+125%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core Ultra 5 235 uses LGA1851 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus DDR5-6400 on the Core Ultra 5 235 — the Core Ultra 5 235 supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core Ultra 5 235 supports up to 256 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 20 (Core Ultra 5 235) — the Core Ultra 5 235 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and Z890,B860 (Core Ultra 5 235).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 5 235
Socket	LGA1200	LGA1851
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 5.0+67%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	DDR5-6400+25%
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	256 GB+100%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	20+25%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. The Core Ultra 5 235 includes integrated graphics (Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 24EU), while the Core i5-10400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, Core Ultra 5 235 targets Mainstream Desktop. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; Core Ultra 5 235 rivals Ryzen 5 8600G.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 5 235
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 24EU
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	Gaming	Mainstream Desktop

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Core Ultra 5 235 debuted at $257. On MSRP ($160 vs $257), the Core i5-10400F is $97 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 155.3 pts/$ for the Core Ultra 5 235 — making the Core Ultra 5 235 the 62.4% better value option.