Core i5-10400F vs Ryzen 7 2700

CPU

GPU

Core i5-10400F

6 Cores12 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.3 GHz2020

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Ryzen 7 2700

8 Cores16 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.1 GHz2018

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i5-10400F

6 / 12

13,029

0.0%

15,633

+20.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX

Ryzen 9 8940HX

Ryzen 9 9950X3D

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

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

✅Costs $139 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $299 MSRP).
✅Delivers 55.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 52.3 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $299 MSRP).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen 7 2700.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 2700 across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 15,633).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 16 MB).

Ryzen 7 2700

2018

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +15.0% higher average FPS across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 52.3 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($299 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Ryzen 7 2700

2018

Why buy it

✅Costs $139 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $299 MSRP).
✅Delivers 55.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 52.3 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $299 MSRP).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen 7 2700.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +15.0% higher average FPS across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 2700 across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 15,633).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 16 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 52.3 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($299 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen 7 2700 better than Core i5-10400F?

Yes. Ryzen 7 2700 is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 15.0% average FPS lead across 6 shared CPU game tests in our data and 20% better PassMark, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Ryzen 7 2700 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 15.0% more average FPS across 6 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Ryzen 7 2700 is the better fit. You are getting 20% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).

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

Ryzen 7 2700 is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-10400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Ryzen 7 2700 is 86.9% more expensive on MSRP at $299 MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you a 15.0% average FPS lead across 6 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-10400F is also 55.7% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 52.3 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds 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 2018). That makes it the safer long-term pick.

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 2700 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 2700
1080p
low	192 FPS	176 FPS
medium	152 FPS	154 FPS
high	123 FPS	128 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	104 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	145 FPS
medium	119 FPS	122 FPS
high	97 FPS	97 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	78 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	66 FPS
medium	70 FPS	59 FPS
high	55 FPS	47 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	37 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 7 2700

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 2700
1080p
low	326 FPS	336 FPS
medium	318 FPS	297 FPS
high	290 FPS	265 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	237 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	307 FPS
medium	292 FPS	278 FPS
high	267 FPS	246 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	215 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	225 FPS
medium	258 FPS	207 FPS
high	235 FPS	193 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	168 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 7 2700

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 2700
1080p
low	326 FPS	391 FPS
medium	326 FPS	391 FPS
high	326 FPS	391 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	391 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	391 FPS
medium	326 FPS	391 FPS
high	326 FPS	391 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	337 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	388 FPS
medium	326 FPS	319 FPS
high	289 FPS	281 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	226 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 7 2700

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 2700
1080p
low	326 FPS	391 FPS
medium	326 FPS	391 FPS
high	326 FPS	391 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	391 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	391 FPS
medium	326 FPS	391 FPS
high	326 FPS	391 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	391 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	391 FPS
medium	326 FPS	391 FPS
high	326 FPS	384 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	332 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 7 2700

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Ryzen 7 2700

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 2700

The Ryzen 7 2700 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 19 April 2018 (7 years ago). It is based on the Zen+ (2018−2019) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 4.1 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB (total). L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 12 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 15,633 points. Launch price was $299.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Ryzen 7 2700 offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Ryzen 7 2700 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 4.1 GHz on the Ryzen 7 2700 — a 4.8% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.2 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Ryzen 7 2700 uses Zen+ (2018−2019) (12 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Ryzen 7 2700's 15,633 — a 18.2% lead for the Ryzen 7 2700. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 16 MB (total) on the Ryzen 7 2700.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 2700
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	8 / 16+33%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+5%	4.1 GHz
Base Clock	2.9 GHz	3.2 GHz+10%
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	16 MB (total)+33%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	512K (per core)+100%
Process	14 nm	12 nm-14%
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Zen+ (2018−2019)
PassMark	13,029	15,633+20%
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 7 2700 uses AM4 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 2700
Socket	LGA1200	AM4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
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 7 2700). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 2700
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 Ryzen 7 2700 debuted at $299. On MSRP ($160 vs $299), the Core i5-10400F is $139 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 52.3 pts/$ for the Ryzen 7 2700 — making the Core i5-10400F the 43.6% better value option.