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 $169 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
✅Delivers 53.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 53.0 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 105W, a 40W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen 7 2700X.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 2700X across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 17,450).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 16 MB).

Ryzen 7 2700X

2018

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +22.9% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).
✅50% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 53.0 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($329 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌61.5% higher power demand at 105W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Ryzen 7 2700X

2018

Why buy it

✅Costs $169 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
✅Delivers 53.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 53.0 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 105W, a 40W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen 7 2700X.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +22.9% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).
✅50% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 2700X across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 17,450).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 16 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 53.0 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($329 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌61.5% higher power demand at 105W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

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

Yes. Ryzen 7 2700X is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 22.9% average FPS lead across 3 shared CPU game tests in our data and 33.9% better PassMark, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Ryzen 7 2700X is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 22.9% more average FPS across 3 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Ryzen 7 2700X is the better fit. You are getting 33.9% 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 2700X is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-10400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Ryzen 7 2700X is 105.6% more expensive on MSRP at $329 MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you a 22.9% average FPS lead across 3 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-10400F is also 53.5% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 53.0 PassMark/$), 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 2700X Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 2700X
1080p
low	192 FPS	223 FPS
medium	152 FPS	191 FPS
high	123 FPS	157 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	116 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	184 FPS
medium	119 FPS	151 FPS
high	97 FPS	121 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	89 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	83 FPS
medium	70 FPS	73 FPS
high	55 FPS	58 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	44 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 7 2700X

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 2700X
1080p
low	326 FPS	349 FPS
medium	318 FPS	306 FPS
high	290 FPS	270 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	240 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	318 FPS
medium	292 FPS	286 FPS
high	267 FPS	251 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	218 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	233 FPS
medium	258 FPS	214 FPS
high	235 FPS	196 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	170 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 7 2700X

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 2700X
1080p
low	326 FPS	436 FPS
medium	326 FPS	436 FPS
high	326 FPS	436 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	436 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	436 FPS
medium	326 FPS	436 FPS
high	326 FPS	408 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	342 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	392 FPS
medium	326 FPS	324 FPS
high	289 FPS	285 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	229 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 7 2700X

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 2700X
1080p
low	326 FPS	436 FPS
medium	326 FPS	436 FPS
high	326 FPS	436 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	436 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	436 FPS
medium	326 FPS	436 FPS
high	326 FPS	436 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	436 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	436 FPS
medium	326 FPS	436 FPS
high	326 FPS	429 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	379 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 7 2700X

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

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

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 2700X

The Ryzen 7 2700X 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 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 4.35 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB (total). L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 12 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 105 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 17,450 points. Launch price was $329.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Ryzen 7 2700X offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Ryzen 7 2700X has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 4.35 GHz on the Ryzen 7 2700X — a 1.2% clock advantage for the Ryzen 7 2700X (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.7 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Ryzen 7 2700X uses Zen+ (2018−2019) (12 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Ryzen 7 2700X's 17,450 — a 29% lead for the Ryzen 7 2700X. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 16 MB (total) on the Ryzen 7 2700X.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 2700X
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	8 / 16+33%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz	4.35 GHz+1%
Base Clock	2.9 GHz	3.7 GHz+28%
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	17,450+34%
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 2700X uses AM4 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR4-2666 memory speed. The Core i5-10400F supports up to 128 GB of RAM compared to 64 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 24 (Ryzen 7 2700X) — the Ryzen 7 2700X offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and AMD 400 series,AMD 300 series (Ryzen 7 2700X).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 2700X
Socket	LGA1200	AM4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	DDR4-2933
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB+100%	64 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	24+50%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Ryzen 7 2700X 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 2700X). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, Ryzen 7 2700X targets Desktop. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 2700X
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	No	Yes
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	AMD-V
Target Use	Gaming	Desktop

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Ryzen 7 2700X debuted at $329. On MSRP ($160 vs $329), the Core i5-10400F is $169 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 53.0 pts/$ for the Ryzen 7 2700X — making the Core i5-10400F the 42.2% better value option.