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

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core Ultra 7 165H.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 7 165H across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 25,849).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 24 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $160 MSRP, while Core Ultra 7 165H mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 7 165H moves to FCBGA2049 and DDR5.

Core Ultra 7 165H

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +91.0% 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.

Trade-offs

❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Core Ultra 7 165H

2023

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core Ultra 7 165H.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +91.0% 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.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 7 165H across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 25,849).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 24 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $160 MSRP, while Core Ultra 7 165H mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 7 165H moves to FCBGA2049 and DDR5.

Trade-offs

❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 7 165H better than Core i5-10400F?

Yes. Core Ultra 7 165H is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 91.0% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data, 98.4% 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 Ultra 7 165H is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 91.0% 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 7 165H is the better fit. You are getting 98.4% better PassMark, backed by 16 cores and 22 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 7 165H is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-10400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Core Ultra 7 165H is at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you a 91.0% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-10400F is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 Ultra 7 165H is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2023 vs 2020), a healthier platform with FCBGA2049 and DDR5 instead of LGA1200, 100% larger total L3 cache (24 MB vs 12 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 16 cores / 22 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 7 165H Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 7 165H
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

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core Ultra 7 165H

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 7 165H
1080p
low	326 FPS	646 FPS
medium	318 FPS	585 FPS
high	290 FPS	478 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	430 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	632 FPS
medium	292 FPS	530 FPS
high	267 FPS	437 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	371 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	375 FPS
medium	258 FPS	320 FPS
high	235 FPS	295 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	258 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core Ultra 7 165H

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 7 165H
1080p
low	326 FPS	646 FPS
medium	326 FPS	646 FPS
high	326 FPS	646 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	646 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	646 FPS
medium	326 FPS	646 FPS
high	326 FPS	631 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	543 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	641 FPS
medium	326 FPS	531 FPS
high	289 FPS	475 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	402 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core Ultra 7 165H

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 7 165H
1080p
low	326 FPS	646 FPS
medium	326 FPS	646 FPS
high	326 FPS	646 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	646 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	646 FPS
medium	326 FPS	646 FPS
high	326 FPS	646 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

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core Ultra 7 165H

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Core Ultra 7 165H

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 165H

The Core Ultra 7 165H 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 5 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: 25,849 points. Launch price was $460.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 165H offers 16 cores / 22 threads — the Core Ultra 7 165H has 10 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5 GHz on the Core Ultra 7 165H — a 15.1% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 7 165H (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 165H uses Meteor Lake-H (2023) (7 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Core Ultra 7 165H's 25,849 — a 65.9% lead for the Core Ultra 7 165H. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 24 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 7 165H.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 7 165H
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	16 / 22+167%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz	5 GHz+16%
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	25,849+98%
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 Ultra 7 165H uses FCBGA2049 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 7 165H
Socket	LGA1200	FCBGA2049
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 5.0+67%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	—
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) / not specified (Core Ultra 7 165H). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.