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

✅+1.6% higher Cinebench R23 multi-core.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 1700 across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 16 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 81.4 vs 105.5 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $140 MSRP).

Ryzen 7 1700

2017

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.4% higher average FPS across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Costs $20 less on MSRP ($140 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
✅Delivers 29.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 105.5 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($140 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
✅50% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,065 vs 8,191).

Core i5-10400F

2020

Ryzen 7 1700

2017

Why buy it

✅+1.6% higher Cinebench R23 multi-core.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.4% higher average FPS across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Costs $20 less on MSRP ($140 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
✅Delivers 29.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 105.5 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($140 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
✅50% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 1700 across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 16 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 81.4 vs 105.5 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $140 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,065 vs 8,191).

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen 7 1700 better than Core i5-10400F?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, Ryzen 7 1700 is ahead with a 4.4% average FPS lead across 6 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i5-10400F pulls ahead with 1.6% better Cinebench R23 multi-core. Ryzen 7 1700 also has the bigger cache pool with 33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).

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 1.6% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads.

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

Ryzen 7 1700 is the smarter buy today. Ryzen 7 1700 is $20 cheaper on MSRP at $140 MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you a 4.4% average FPS lead across 6 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that Core i5-10400F is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 1.6% better Cinebench R23 multi-core. It is also 29.6% better value on MSRP (105.5 vs 81.4 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper. That said, if you already own a compatible LGA1200 + DDR4 setup, Core i5-10400F 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?

Core i5-10400F is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2020 vs 2017) and more multi-core headroom with 6 cores / 12 threads instead of 8/16. 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

Ryzen 7 1700 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 1700
1080p
low	192 FPS	168 FPS
medium	152 FPS	144 FPS
high	123 FPS	117 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	95 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	142 FPS
medium	119 FPS	119 FPS
high	97 FPS	94 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	76 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	64 FPS
medium	70 FPS	58 FPS
high	55 FPS	46 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	36 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 7 1700

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 1700
1080p
low	326 FPS	277 FPS
medium	318 FPS	245 FPS
high	290 FPS	219 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	180 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	244 FPS
medium	292 FPS	221 FPS
high	267 FPS	197 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	162 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	177 FPS
medium	258 FPS	165 FPS
high	235 FPS	151 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	120 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 7 1700

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 1700
1080p
low	326 FPS	369 FPS
medium	326 FPS	369 FPS
high	326 FPS	369 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	369 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	369 FPS
medium	326 FPS	369 FPS
high	326 FPS	367 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	311 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	350 FPS
medium	326 FPS	284 FPS
high	289 FPS	258 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	209 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 7 1700

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 1700
1080p
low	326 FPS	369 FPS
medium	326 FPS	369 FPS
high	326 FPS	369 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	369 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	369 FPS
medium	326 FPS	369 FPS
high	326 FPS	369 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	369 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	369 FPS
medium	326 FPS	369 FPS
high	326 FPS	361 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	311 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 7 1700

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Ryzen 7 1700

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 7 1700

The Ryzen 7 1700 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2 March 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Zen (2017−2020) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 16384 kB. L2 cache: 4096 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 14,772 points. Launch price was $329.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Ryzen 7 1700 offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Ryzen 7 1700 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 3.7 GHz on the Ryzen 7 1700 — a 15% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Ryzen 7 1700 uses Zen (2017−2020) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Ryzen 7 1700's 14,772 — a 12.5% lead for the Ryzen 7 1700. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 8,191 vs 8,065 (1.6% advantage for the Core i5-10400F). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 1,000, a 37% lead for the Core i5-10400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 5,783 vs 5,000 (14.5% advantage for the Core i5-10400F). L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 16384 kB on the Ryzen 7 1700.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 1700
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	8 / 16+33%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+16%	3.7 GHz
Base Clock	2.9 GHz	3 GHz+3%
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	16384 kB+33%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	4096 kB+1500%
Process	14 nm	14 nm
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Zen (2017−2020)
PassMark	13,029	14,772+13%
Cinebench R23 Multi	8,191+2%	8,065
Geekbench 6 Single	1,454+45%	1,000
Geekbench 6 Multi	5,783+16%	5,000

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Ryzen 7 1700 uses AM4 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR4-2666 memory speed. Both support up to 128 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 24 (Ryzen 7 1700) — the Ryzen 7 1700 offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and B350,X370,B450,X470,A520,B550,X570 (Ryzen 7 1700).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 1700
Socket	LGA1200	AM4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	DDR4-2666
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	128 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	24+50%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Ryzen 7 1700 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) vs AMD-V (Ryzen 7 1700). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, Ryzen 7 1700 targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; Ryzen 7 1700 rivals Core i7-7700K.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 1700
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	No	Yes
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	AMD-V
Target Use	Gaming	Workstation

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Ryzen 7 1700 debuted at $140. On MSRP ($160 vs $140), the Ryzen 7 1700 is $20 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 105.5 pts/$ for the Ryzen 7 1700 — making the Ryzen 7 1700 the 25.8% better value option.