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 $440 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $600 MSRP).
✅Delivers 140.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 33.8 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $600 MSRP).
✅100% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core Ultra 9 288V.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 9 288V across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,191 vs 9,300).
❌116.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 30W.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 9 288V moves to FCBGA2833 and DDR5.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 9 288V can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core Ultra 9 288V

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +48.3% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 30W instead of 65W, a 35W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA2833 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc 140V, while Core i5-10400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 33.8 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($600 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Core Ultra 9 288V

2024

Why buy it

✅Costs $440 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $600 MSRP).
✅Delivers 140.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 33.8 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $600 MSRP).
✅100% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core Ultra 9 288V.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +48.3% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 30W instead of 65W, a 35W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA2833 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc 140V, while Core i5-10400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 9 288V across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,191 vs 9,300).
❌116.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 30W.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 9 288V moves to FCBGA2833 and DDR5.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 9 288V can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 33.8 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($600 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 9 288V better than Core i5-10400F?

Yes. Core Ultra 9 288V is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 48.3% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data, 13.5% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, 55.7% higher 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 288V is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 48.3% 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 288V is the better fit. You are getting 13.5% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 8 cores and 8 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core Ultra 9 288V is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-10400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Core Ultra 9 288V is 275.0% more expensive on MSRP at $600 MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you a 48.3% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-10400F is also 140.9% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 33.8 PassMark/$), 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 9 288V is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2020), a healthier platform with FCBGA2833 and DDR5 instead of LGA1200, and more multi-core headroom with 8 cores / 8 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 288V Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 9 288V
1080p
low	192 FPS	278 FPS
medium	152 FPS	246 FPS
high	123 FPS	207 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	178 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	235 FPS
medium	119 FPS	187 FPS
high	97 FPS	153 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	135 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	163 FPS
medium	70 FPS	132 FPS
high	55 FPS	102 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	89 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core Ultra 9 288V

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 9 288V
1080p
low	326 FPS	481 FPS
medium	318 FPS	383 FPS
high	290 FPS	337 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	298 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	426 FPS
medium	292 FPS	352 FPS
high	267 FPS	312 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	267 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	311 FPS
medium	258 FPS	269 FPS
high	235 FPS	251 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	218 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core Ultra 9 288V

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 9 288V
1080p
low	326 FPS	507 FPS
medium	326 FPS	507 FPS
high	326 FPS	507 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	507 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	507 FPS
medium	326 FPS	507 FPS
high	326 FPS	507 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	477 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	507 FPS
medium	326 FPS	473 FPS
high	289 FPS	419 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	349 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core Ultra 9 288V

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 9 288V
1080p
low	326 FPS	507 FPS
medium	326 FPS	507 FPS
high	326 FPS	507 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	507 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	507 FPS
medium	326 FPS	507 FPS
high	326 FPS	507 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	507 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	507 FPS
medium	326 FPS	507 FPS
high	326 FPS	496 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	433 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core Ultra 9 288V

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Core Ultra 9 288V

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 288V

The Core Ultra 9 288V is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 September 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Lunar Lake (2024) architecture. It features 8 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.3 GHz, with boost up to 5.1 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 2.5 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2833. Thermal design power (TDP): 30 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 20,280 points. Launch price was $299.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core Ultra 9 288V offers 8 cores / 8 threads — the Core Ultra 9 288V has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5.1 GHz on the Core Ultra 9 288V — a 17% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 9 288V (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.3 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Core Ultra 9 288V uses Lunar Lake (2024) (3 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Core Ultra 9 288V's 20,280 — a 43.5% lead for the Core Ultra 9 288V. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 8,191 vs 9,300 (12.7% advantage for the Core Ultra 9 288V). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 2,800, a 63.3% lead for the Core Ultra 9 288V that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 5,783 vs 10,000 (53.4% advantage for the Core Ultra 9 288V). Both processors carry 12 MB (total) of L3 cache.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 9 288V
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	8 / 8+33%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz	5.1 GHz+19%
Base Clock	2.9 GHz	3.3 GHz+14%
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	12 MB (total)
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	2.5 MB (per core)+900%
Process	14 nm	3 nm-79%
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Lunar Lake (2024)
PassMark	13,029	20,280+56%
Cinebench R23 Multi	8,191	9,300+14%
Geekbench 6 Single	1,454	2,800+93%
Geekbench 6 Multi	5,783	10,000+73%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core Ultra 9 288V uses FCBGA2833 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus LPDDR5X-8533 on the Core Ultra 9 288V — the Core Ultra 9 288V 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 32 GB — 120% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 8 (Core Ultra 9 288V) — the Core i5-10400F offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and SoC (Core Ultra 9 288V).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 9 288V
Socket	LGA1200	FCBGA2833
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 5.0+67%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	LPDDR5X-8533+25%
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB+300%	32 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16+100%	8

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) vs true (Core Ultra 9 288V). The Core Ultra 9 288V includes integrated graphics (Intel Arc 140V), 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.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core Ultra 9 288V
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	Intel Arc 140V
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	true
Target Use	Gaming	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Core Ultra 9 288V debuted at $600. On MSRP ($160 vs $600), the Core i5-10400F is $440 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 33.8 pts/$ for the Core Ultra 9 288V — making the Core i5-10400F the 82.7% better value option.