
Core i5-10400F
Popular choices:

Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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
2020Why buy it
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 21,408).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 16 MB).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $160 MSRP, while Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌132.1% higher power demand at 65W vs 28W.
Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS
2024Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +44.8% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Draws 28W instead of 65W, a 37W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FP7 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Core i5-10400F
2020Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS
2024Why buy it
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +44.8% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Draws 28W instead of 65W, a 37W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FP7 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 21,408).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 16 MB).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $160 MSRP, while Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌132.1% higher power demand at 65W vs 28W.
Trade-offs
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS 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?
Games Benchmarks
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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 192 FPS | 262 FPS |
| medium | 152 FPS | 238 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 203 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 173 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 230 FPS |
| medium | 119 FPS | 189 FPS |
| high | 97 FPS | 156 FPS |
| ultra | 79 FPS | 136 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 156 FPS |
| medium | 70 FPS | 130 FPS |
| high | 55 FPS | 101 FPS |
| ultra | 43 FPS | 88 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 374 FPS |
| medium | 318 FPS | 314 FPS |
| high | 290 FPS | 278 FPS |
| ultra | 253 FPS | 240 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 316 FPS |
| medium | 292 FPS | 276 FPS |
| high | 267 FPS | 251 FPS |
| ultra | 234 FPS | 212 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 309 FPS | 237 FPS |
| medium | 258 FPS | 211 FPS |
| high | 235 FPS | 197 FPS |
| ultra | 199 FPS | 164 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 535 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 535 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 535 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 535 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 535 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 535 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 511 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 437 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 482 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 415 FPS |
| high | 289 FPS | 355 FPS |
| ultra | 229 FPS | 293 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 535 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 535 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 535 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 535 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 535 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 535 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 535 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 535 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 535 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 531 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 473 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 411 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS

Core i5-10400F
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.


Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS
Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS
The Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 16 April 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Hawk Point (2024−2025) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 4.9 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: FP7. Thermal design power (TDP): 28 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 21,408 points. Launch price was $299.
Processing Power
Both the Core i5-10400F and Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS share an identical 6-core/12-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 4.9 GHz on the Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS — a 13% clock advantage for the Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.5 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS uses Hawk Point (2024−2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS's 21,408 — a 48.7% lead for the Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 16 MB (total) on the Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 6 / 12 |
| Boost Clock | 4.3 GHz | 4.9 GHz+14% |
| Base Clock | 2.9 GHz | 3.5 GHz+21% |
| L3 Cache | 12 MB (total) | 16 MB (total)+33% |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 1 MB (per core)+300% |
| Process | 14 nm | 4 nm-71% |
| Architecture | Comet Lake (2020−2025) | Hawk Point (2024−2025) |
| PassMark | 13,029 | 21,408+64% |
| 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 Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS uses FP7 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1200 | FP7 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 4.0+33% |
| 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 (Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | — |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | — |
| Target Use | Gaming | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.











