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.

Core i5-10400F vs Core Ultra 9 275HX FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core i5-10400F vs Core Ultra 9 275HX: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Why buy it

✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core Ultra 9 275HX.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 9 275HX across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (5,783 vs 17,908).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 36 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $160 MSRP, while Core Ultra 9 275HX mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.

Core Ultra 9 275HX

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +56.7% higher average FPS across 50 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 FCBGA2114 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
✅50% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

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

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 9 275HX better than Core i5-10400F?

Yes. Core Ultra 9 275HX is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 56.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 209.7% better Geekbench multi-core, 329.9% higher PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core Ultra 9 275HX is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 56.7% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core Ultra 9 275HX is the stronger fit. You are getting 209.7% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 24 cores and 24 threads. It also has 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 Ultra 9 275HX is still the much better call for a fresh build. Core Ultra 9 275HX comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it still gives you a 56.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-10400F only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2020 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (81.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA1200.

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

Core Ultra 9 275HX makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2020), a healthier platform with FCBGA2114 and DDR5 instead of LGA1200, 200% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 12 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 24 cores / 24 threads instead of 6/12. That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

Core i5-10400F vs Core Ultra 9 275HX Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

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 9 275HX

The Core Ultra 9 275HX is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2025-01-01. It is based on the Arrow Lake-HX (2025) architecture. It features 24 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 5.4 GHz. L3 cache: 36 MB (total). L2 cache: 3 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2114. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 56,018 points. Launch price was $600.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core Ultra 9 275HX offers 24 cores / 24 threads — the Core Ultra 9 275HX has 18 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5.4 GHz on the Core Ultra 9 275HX — a 22.7% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 9 275HX (base: 2.9 GHz vs 2.7 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Core Ultra 9 275HX uses Arrow Lake-HX (2025) (3 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Core Ultra 9 275HX's 56,018 — a 124.5% lead for the Core Ultra 9 275HX. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 2,835, a 64.4% lead for the Core Ultra 9 275HX that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 5,783 vs 17,908 (102.4% advantage for the Core Ultra 9 275HX). L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 36 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 9 275HX.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 9 275HX
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	24 / 24+300%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz	5.4 GHz+26%
Base Clock	2.9 GHz+7%	2.7 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	36 MB (total)+200%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)+8433%	3 MB (per core)
Process	14 nm	3 nm-79%
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Arrow Lake-HX (2025)
PassMark	13,029	56,018+330%
Cinebench R23 Multi	8,191	—
Geekbench 6 Single	1,454	2,835+95%
Geekbench 6 Multi	5,783	17,908+210%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core Ultra 9 275HX uses FCBGA2114 (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 9 275HX — the Core Ultra 9 275HX supports 140.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core Ultra 9 275HX supports up to 256 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 24 (Core Ultra 9 275HX) — the Core Ultra 9 275HX offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and HM870,WM880 (Core Ultra 9 275HX).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 9 275HX
Socket	LGA1200	FCBGA2114
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 5.0+67%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	DDR5-6400+140%
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	256 GB+100%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	24+50%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Core Ultra 9 275HX has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. The Core Ultra 9 275HX includes integrated graphics (Intel Arc Graphics), while the Core i5-10400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, Core Ultra 9 275HX targets High-End Gaming Laptop. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; Core Ultra 9 275HX rivals Ryzen 9 9955HX.