
Core i5-10400F

Core Ultra 9 285
Core i5-10400F vs Core Ultra 9 285 Performance Spectrum
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.
Core i5-10400F vs Core Ultra 9 285 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.

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Valorant

Among Us

Apex Legends

ARC Raiders

Baldur's Gate 3

Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
Core i5-10400F vs Core Ultra 9 285: 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
2020Why buy it
- ✅Costs $429 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $589 MSRP).
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core Ultra 9 285.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 9 285 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,191 vs 40,000).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 36 MB).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 81.4 vs 97.5 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $589 MSRP).
- ❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 9 285 moves to LGA1851 and DDR5.
Core Ultra 9 285
2025Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +56.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+200% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Delivers 19.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 97.5 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($589 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1851 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
- ✅50% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌268.1% HIGHER MSRP$589 MSRPvs$160 MSRP
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Core Ultra 9 285 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?
Core i5-10400F vs Core Ultra 9 285 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 9 285
The Core Ultra 9 285 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in Janeiro 2025 (recentemente). It is based on the Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) architecture. It features 24 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 5.5 GHz. L3 cache: 36 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: 57,442 points. Launch price was $579.
Processing Power
The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core Ultra 9 285 offers 24 cores / 24 threads — the Core Ultra 9 285 has 18 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5.5 GHz on the Core Ultra 9 285 — a 24.5% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 9 285 (base: 2.9 GHz vs 2.5 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Core Ultra 9 285 uses Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) (3 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Core Ultra 9 285's 57,442 — a 126% lead for the Core Ultra 9 285. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 8,191 vs 40,000 (132% advantage for the Core Ultra 9 285). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 3,000, a 69.4% lead for the Core Ultra 9 285 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 5,783 vs 20,000 (110.3% advantage for the Core Ultra 9 285). L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 36 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 9 285.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core Ultra 9 285 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 24 / 24+300% |
| Boost Clock | 4.3 GHz | 5.5 GHz+28% |
| Base Clock | 2.9 GHz+16% | 2.5 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-S (2024−2025) |
| PassMark | 13,029 | 57,442+341% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 8,191 | 40,000+388% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,454 | 3,000+106% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 5,783 | 20,000+246% |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core Ultra 9 285 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 9 285 — the Core Ultra 9 285 supports 140.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core Ultra 9 285 supports up to 192 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 50% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 24 (Core Ultra 9 285) — the Core Ultra 9 285 offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and Intel 800 Series (Core Ultra 9 285).
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core Ultra 9 285 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1200 | LGA1851 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 5.0+67% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666 | DDR5-6400+140% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB | 192 GB+50% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 24+50% |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) vs Yes (Core Ultra 9 285). The Core Ultra 9 285 includes integrated graphics (Arc Graphics), while the Core i5-10400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, Core Ultra 9 285 targets High-End Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core Ultra 9 285 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Arc Graphics |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | Yes |
| Target Use | Gaming | High-End Gaming |
Value Analysis
At launch, the Core i5-10400F was priced at $160, while the Core Ultra 9 285 came in at $589. On launch pricing ($160 vs $589), Core i5-10400F was $429 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 97.5 pts/$ for the Core Ultra 9 285 — making the Core Ultra 9 285 the 18% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core Ultra 9 285 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $160-73% | $589 |
| Performance per Dollar | 81.4 | 97.5+20% |
| Release Date | 2020 | 2025 |
Affiliate Disclosure
ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.
Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.














