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 $389 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
✅Delivers 21.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 67.2 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core Ultra 9 285T.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 9 285T across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 36,916).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 36 MB).
❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 9 285T moves to LGA1851 and DDR5.

Core Ultra 9 285T

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +73.5% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+200% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.
✅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

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 67.2 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($549 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Core Ultra 9 285T

2025

Why buy it

✅Costs $389 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
✅Delivers 21.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 67.2 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core Ultra 9 285T.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +73.5% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+200% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.
✅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 9 285T across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 36,916).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 36 MB).
❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 9 285T moves to LGA1851 and DDR5.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 67.2 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($549 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 9 285T better than Core i5-10400F?

Yes. Core Ultra 9 285T is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 73.5% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data, 183.3% 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 9 285T is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 73.5% 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 9 285T is the better fit. You are getting 183.3% better PassMark, backed by 24 cores and 24 threads. It also carries 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 285T is the smarter buy by a wide margin for a fresh build. Core Ultra 9 285T is 243.1% more expensive on MSRP at $549 MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you a 73.5% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-10400F only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that is mostly used-market pricing on an obsolete 2020 platform. Even with 21.1% better value on paper (81.4 vs 67.2 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a very 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 285T 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, 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 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 9 285T Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 9 285T
1080p
low	192 FPS	309 FPS
medium	152 FPS	299 FPS
high	123 FPS	246 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	208 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	269 FPS
medium	119 FPS	228 FPS
high	97 FPS	175 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	154 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	179 FPS
medium	70 FPS	151 FPS
high	55 FPS	112 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	101 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core Ultra 9 285T

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 9 285T
1080p
low	326 FPS	429 FPS
medium	318 FPS	375 FPS
high	290 FPS	306 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	267 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	364 FPS
medium	292 FPS	328 FPS
high	267 FPS	273 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	220 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	204 FPS
medium	258 FPS	187 FPS
high	235 FPS	178 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	154 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core Ultra 9 285T

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 9 285T
1080p
low	326 FPS	844 FPS
medium	326 FPS	690 FPS
high	326 FPS	612 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	525 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	723 FPS
medium	326 FPS	594 FPS
high	326 FPS	514 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	441 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	512 FPS
medium	326 FPS	434 FPS
high	289 FPS	392 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	335 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core Ultra 9 285T

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 9 285T
1080p
low	326 FPS	923 FPS
medium	326 FPS	923 FPS
high	326 FPS	829 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	744 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	852 FPS
medium	326 FPS	747 FPS
high	326 FPS	650 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	575 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	628 FPS
medium	326 FPS	559 FPS
high	326 FPS	493 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	435 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core Ultra 9 285T

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Core Ultra 9 285T

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 285T

The Core Ultra 9 285T 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 24 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 1.4 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: LGA1851. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 36,916 points. Launch price was $549.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core Ultra 9 285T offers 24 cores / 24 threads — the Core Ultra 9 285T has 18 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5.4 GHz on the Core Ultra 9 285T — a 22.7% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 9 285T (base: 2.9 GHz vs 1.4 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Core Ultra 9 285T uses Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) (3 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Core Ultra 9 285T's 36,916 — a 95.7% lead for the Core Ultra 9 285T. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 36 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 9 285T.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 9 285T
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	24 / 24+300%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz	5.4 GHz+26%
Base Clock	2.9 GHz+107%	1.4 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	36 MB (total)+200%
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	36,916+183%
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 9 285T uses LGA1851 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus 6400 on the Core Ultra 9 285T — the Core Ultra 9 285T supports 199.8% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core Ultra 9 285T supports up to 256 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 9 285T) — the Core Ultra 9 285T 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 9 285T).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 9 285T
Socket	LGA1200	LGA1851
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 5.0+67%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	6400+159900%
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB+52428700%	256
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 9 285T includes integrated graphics (Intel Arc Xe-LPG Graphics), while the Core i5-10400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; Core Ultra 9 285T rivals Ryzen 9 7900.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 9 285T
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	Intel Arc Xe-LPG Graphics
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	Gaming	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Core Ultra 9 285T debuted at $549. On MSRP ($160 vs $549), the Core i5-10400F is $389 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 67.2 pts/$ for the Core Ultra 9 285T — making the Core i5-10400F the 19.1% better value option.