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: +57.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 6 MB).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Processor 300.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 81.4 vs 88.6 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $82 MSRP).
❌41.3% higher power demand at 65W vs 46W.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Processor 300 moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.

Processor 300

2024

Why buy it

✅Costs $78 less on MSRP ($82 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
✅Delivers 8.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 88.6 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($82 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
✅Draws 46W instead of 65W, a 19W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (7,264 vs 13,029).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (6 MB vs 12 MB).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Processor 300

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +57.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 6 MB).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Processor 300.

Why buy it

✅Costs $78 less on MSRP ($82 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
✅Delivers 8.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 88.6 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($82 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
✅Draws 46W instead of 65W, a 19W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 81.4 vs 88.6 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $82 MSRP).
❌41.3% higher power demand at 65W vs 46W.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Processor 300 moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (7,264 vs 13,029).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (6 MB vs 12 MB).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-10400F better than Processor 300?

Yes. Core i5-10400F is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 57.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 79.4% better PassMark, 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 57.9% 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 79.4% better PassMark, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 6 MB).

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

Core i5-10400F is still the faster CPU overall, but Processor 300 makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Core i5-10400F is 95.1% more expensive on MSRP at $160 MSRP versus $82 MSRP, and it gives you a 57.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Processor 300 is also 8.8% better value on MSRP (88.6 vs 81.4 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper. That said, if you already own a compatible LGA1700 + DDR5 setup, Processor 300 can still make sense as a platform-matched option because it avoids a motherboard and RAM swap.

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

Processor 300 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2020) and a healthier platform with LGA1700 and DDR5 instead of LGA1200. 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

Processor 300 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Processor 300
1080p
low	192 FPS	172 FPS
medium	152 FPS	144 FPS
high	123 FPS	110 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	89 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	148 FPS
medium	119 FPS	120 FPS
high	97 FPS	91 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	73 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	69 FPS
medium	70 FPS	60 FPS
high	55 FPS	46 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	36 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Processor 300

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Processor 300
1080p
low	326 FPS	177 FPS
medium	318 FPS	156 FPS
high	290 FPS	139 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	100 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	141 FPS
medium	292 FPS	122 FPS
high	267 FPS	110 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	86 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	103 FPS
medium	258 FPS	92 FPS
high	235 FPS	71 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	49 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Processor 300

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Processor 300
1080p
low	326 FPS	182 FPS
medium	326 FPS	182 FPS
high	326 FPS	182 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	182 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	182 FPS
medium	326 FPS	182 FPS
high	326 FPS	182 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	182 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	182 FPS
medium	326 FPS	182 FPS
high	289 FPS	182 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	168 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Processor 300

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Processor 300
1080p
low	326 FPS	182 FPS
medium	326 FPS	182 FPS
high	326 FPS	182 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	182 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	182 FPS
medium	326 FPS	182 FPS
high	326 FPS	182 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	182 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	182 FPS
medium	326 FPS	182 FPS
high	326 FPS	182 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	182 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Processor 300

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Processor 300

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.

Processor 300

The Processor 300 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 January 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.9 GHz, with boost up to 3.9 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB (total). L2 cache: 1.25 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 46 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 7,264 points. Launch price was $82.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Processor 300 offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the Core i5-10400F has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 3.9 GHz on the Processor 300 — a 9.8% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.9 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Processor 300 uses Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) (Intel 7 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Processor 300's 7,264 — a 56.8% lead for the Core i5-10400F. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 6 MB (total) on the Processor 300.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Processor 300
Cores / Threads	6 / 12+200%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+10%	3.9 GHz
Base Clock	2.9 GHz	3.9 GHz+34%
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)+100%	6 MB (total)
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	1.25 MB (per core)+400%
Process	14 nm	Intel 7 nm-50%
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)
PassMark	13,029+79%	7,264
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 Processor 300 uses LGA1700 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Processor 300
Socket	LGA1200	LGA1700
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 5.0+67%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	—
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) / not specified (Processor 300). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Processor 300
Integrated GPU	No	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	—
Target Use	Gaming	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Processor 300 debuted at $82. On MSRP ($160 vs $82), the Processor 300 is $78 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 88.6 pts/$ for the Processor 300 — making the Processor 300 the 8.4% better value option.