Core i5-10400F vs FX-7500

CPU

GPU

Core i5-10400F

6 Cores12 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.3 GHz2020

Popular choices:

•••••••••

FX-7500

4 Cores4 Thrd19 WWMax: 3.3 GHz2014

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i5-10400F

6 / 12

13,029

+306.0%

3,209

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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.

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

✅Better for gaming: +153.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Delivers 153.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 32.1 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $100 MSRP).
✅100% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike FX-7500.

Trade-offs

❌
60% HIGHER MSRP
$160 MSRPvs$100 MSRP
❌242.1% higher power demand at 65W vs 19W.
❌No integrated graphics, while FX-7500 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

FX-7500

2014

Why buy it

✅Costs $60 less on MSRP ($100 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
✅Draws 19W instead of 65W, a 46W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon R7, while Core i5-10400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (3,209 vs 13,029).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 32.1 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($100 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

FX-7500

2014

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +153.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Delivers 153.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 32.1 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $100 MSRP).
✅100% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike FX-7500.

Why buy it

✅Costs $60 less on MSRP ($100 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
✅Draws 19W instead of 65W, a 46W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon R7, while Core i5-10400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌
60% HIGHER MSRP
$160 MSRPvs$100 MSRP
❌242.1% higher power demand at 65W vs 19W.
❌No integrated graphics, while FX-7500 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (3,209 vs 13,029).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 32.1 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($100 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-10400F better than FX-7500?

Yes. Core i5-10400F is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 153.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 306% 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 i5-10400F is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 153.9% 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 i5-10400F is the better fit. You are getting 306% better PassMark, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads.

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

Core i5-10400F is the smarter buy today. Core i5-10400F is 60.0% more expensive on MSRP at $160 MSRP versus $100 MSRP, and it gives you a 153.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 153.8% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 32.1 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

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

Core i5-10400F is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2020 vs 2014) and more multi-core headroom with 6 cores / 12 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom should age better as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

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

FX-7500 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	FX-7500
1080p
low	192 FPS	80 FPS
medium	152 FPS	80 FPS
high	123 FPS	80 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	80 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	80 FPS
medium	119 FPS	80 FPS
high	97 FPS	80 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	71 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	62 FPS
medium	70 FPS	56 FPS
high	55 FPS	44 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	34 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open FX-7500

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	FX-7500
1080p
low	326 FPS	80 FPS
medium	318 FPS	80 FPS
high	290 FPS	80 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	68 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	80 FPS
medium	292 FPS	80 FPS
high	267 FPS	74 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	61 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	67 FPS
medium	258 FPS	59 FPS
high	235 FPS	47 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	34 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open FX-7500

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	FX-7500
1080p
low	326 FPS	80 FPS
medium	326 FPS	80 FPS
high	326 FPS	80 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	80 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	80 FPS
medium	326 FPS	80 FPS
high	326 FPS	80 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	80 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	80 FPS
medium	326 FPS	80 FPS
high	289 FPS	80 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	80 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open FX-7500

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	FX-7500
1080p
low	326 FPS	80 FPS
medium	326 FPS	80 FPS
high	326 FPS	80 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	80 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	80 FPS
medium	326 FPS	80 FPS
high	326 FPS	80 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	80 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	80 FPS
medium	326 FPS	80 FPS
high	326 FPS	80 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	80 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open FX-7500

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and FX-7500

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.

FX-7500

The FX-7500 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 4 June 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Kaveri (2014−2015) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.3 GHz. L2 cache: 4096 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 19 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 3,209 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the FX-7500 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Core i5-10400F has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 3.3 GHz on the FX-7500 — a 26.3% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.9 GHz vs 2.1 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the FX-7500 uses Kaveri (2014−2015) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the FX-7500's 3,209 — a 121% lead for the Core i5-10400F.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	FX-7500
Cores / Threads	6 / 12+50%	4 / 4
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+30%	3.3 GHz
Base Clock	2.9 GHz+38%	2.1 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	—
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	4096 kB+1500%
Process	14 nm-50%	28 nm
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Kaveri (2014−2015)
PassMark	13,029+306%	3,209
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 FX-7500 uses FP3 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus DDR3-1600 on the FX-7500 — the Core i5-10400F supports 28.6% 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 16 GB — 155.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 8 (FX-7500) — the Core i5-10400F offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	FX-7500
Socket	LGA1200	FP3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666+33%	DDR3-1600
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB+700%	16 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16+100%	8

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) vs AMD-V (FX-7500). The FX-7500 includes integrated graphics (Radeon R7), while the Core i5-10400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, FX-7500 targets Mobile. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	FX-7500
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	Radeon R7
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	AMD-V
Target Use	Gaming	Mobile

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the FX-7500 debuted at $100. On MSRP ($160 vs $100), the FX-7500 is $60 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 32.1 pts/$ for the FX-7500 — making the Core i5-10400F the 86.9% better value option.