
Core i5-10400F
Popular choices:

Core Ultra 7 155H
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
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 7 155H across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,191 vs 17,650).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 24 MB).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $160 MSRP, while Core Ultra 7 155H mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 7 155H moves to FCBGA2049 and DDR5.
Core Ultra 7 155H
2023Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +81.4% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+100% larger total L3 cache (24 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Newer platform on FCBGA2049 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
- ✅75% more PCIe lanes (28 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc Graphics (8 Xe-cores), while Core i5-10400F needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.
Core i5-10400F
2020Core Ultra 7 155H
2023Why buy it
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +81.4% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+100% larger total L3 cache (24 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Newer platform on FCBGA2049 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
- ✅75% more PCIe lanes (28 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc Graphics (8 Xe-cores), while Core i5-10400F needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 7 155H across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,191 vs 17,650).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 24 MB).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $160 MSRP, while Core Ultra 7 155H mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 7 155H moves to FCBGA2049 and DDR5.
Trade-offs
- ❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.
Quick Answers
So, is Core Ultra 7 155H 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 Ultra 7 155H |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 192 FPS | 308 FPS |
| medium | 152 FPS | 278 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 232 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 198 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 251 FPS |
| medium | 119 FPS | 201 FPS |
| high | 97 FPS | 163 FPS |
| ultra | 79 FPS | 143 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 173 FPS |
| medium | 70 FPS | 139 FPS |
| high | 55 FPS | 107 FPS |
| ultra | 43 FPS | 93 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Core Ultra 7 155H |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 618 FPS |
| medium | 318 FPS | 532 FPS |
| high | 290 FPS | 434 FPS |
| ultra | 253 FPS | 389 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 544 FPS |
| medium | 292 FPS | 457 FPS |
| high | 267 FPS | 385 FPS |
| ultra | 234 FPS | 328 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 309 FPS | 336 FPS |
| medium | 258 FPS | 286 FPS |
| high | 235 FPS | 261 FPS |
| ultra | 199 FPS | 229 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Core Ultra 7 155H |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 618 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 618 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 618 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 618 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 618 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 618 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 618 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 543 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 618 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 531 FPS |
| high | 289 FPS | 475 FPS |
| ultra | 229 FPS | 402 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Core Ultra 7 155H |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 618 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 618 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 618 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 618 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 618 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 618 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 618 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 579 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 606 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 538 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 486 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 423 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Core Ultra 7 155H

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 Ultra 7 155H
Core Ultra 7 155H
The Core Ultra 7 155H is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 14 December 2023 (1 year ago). It is based on the Meteor Lake-H (2023) architecture. It features 16 cores and 22 threads. Base frequency is 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 4.8 GHz. L3 cache: 24 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on 7 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2049. Thermal design power (TDP): + 24 MB. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 24,705 points. Launch price was $503.
Processing Power
The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 155H offers 16 cores / 22 threads — the Core Ultra 7 155H has 10 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 4.8 GHz on the Core Ultra 7 155H — a 11% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 7 155H (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.8 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Core Ultra 7 155H uses Meteor Lake-H (2023) (7 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Core Ultra 7 155H's 24,705 — a 61.9% lead for the Core Ultra 7 155H. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 8,191 vs 17,650 (73.2% advantage for the Core Ultra 7 155H). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 2,384, a 48.5% lead for the Core Ultra 7 155H that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 5,783 vs 12,433 (73% advantage for the Core Ultra 7 155H). L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 24 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 7 155H.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core Ultra 7 155H |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 16 / 22+167% |
| Boost Clock | 4.3 GHz | 4.8 GHz+12% |
| Base Clock | 2.9 GHz | 3.8 GHz+31% |
| L3 Cache | 12 MB (total) | 24 MB (total)+100% |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 2 MB (per core)+700% |
| Process | 14 nm | 7 nm-50% |
| Architecture | Comet Lake (2020−2025) | Meteor Lake-H (2023) |
| PassMark | 13,029 | 24,705+90% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 8,191 | 17,650+115% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,454 | 2,384+64% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 5,783 | 12,433+115% |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core Ultra 7 155H uses FCBGA2049 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus LPDDR5x-7467, DDR5-5600 on the Core Ultra 7 155H — the Core Ultra 7 155H supports 22.2% 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 96 GB — 28.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 28 (Core Ultra 7 155H) — the Core Ultra 7 155H offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and Meteor Lake SoC (Core Ultra 7 155H).
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core Ultra 7 155H |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1200 | FCBGA2049 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 5.0+67% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666 | LPDDR5x-7467, DDR5-5600+25% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB+33% | 96 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | No | No |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 28+75% |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core Ultra 7 155H). The Core Ultra 7 155H includes integrated graphics (Intel Arc Graphics (8 Xe-cores)), while the Core i5-10400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, Core Ultra 7 155H targets Thin-and-light Performance / AI. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; Core Ultra 7 155H rivals Ryzen 7 8840HS.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core Ultra 7 155H |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Intel Arc Graphics (8 Xe-cores) |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d, EPT |
| Target Use | Gaming | Thin-and-light Performance / AI |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












