
Core i5-10400F
Popular choices:

Ryzen 7 7840H
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 7 7840H.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 7840H across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 27,832).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 16 MB).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $160 MSRP, while Ryzen 7 7840H mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.
Ryzen 7 7840H
2023Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +83.1% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FP8 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Core i5-10400F
2020Ryzen 7 7840H
2023Why buy it
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen 7 7840H.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +83.1% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FP8 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 7840H across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 27,832).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 16 MB).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $160 MSRP, while Ryzen 7 7840H mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.
Trade-offs
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen 7 7840H 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 7 7840H |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 192 FPS | 268 FPS |
| medium | 152 FPS | 241 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 206 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 176 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 234 FPS |
| medium | 119 FPS | 191 FPS |
| high | 97 FPS | 158 FPS |
| ultra | 79 FPS | 138 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 160 FPS |
| medium | 70 FPS | 132 FPS |
| high | 55 FPS | 102 FPS |
| ultra | 43 FPS | 89 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen 7 7840H |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 499 FPS |
| medium | 318 FPS | 415 FPS |
| high | 290 FPS | 358 FPS |
| ultra | 253 FPS | 318 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 437 FPS |
| medium | 292 FPS | 383 FPS |
| high | 267 FPS | 331 FPS |
| ultra | 234 FPS | 280 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 309 FPS | 290 FPS |
| medium | 258 FPS | 265 FPS |
| high | 235 FPS | 250 FPS |
| ultra | 199 FPS | 215 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen 7 7840H |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 696 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 696 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 696 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 650 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 696 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 637 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 548 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 464 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 534 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 460 FPS |
| high | 289 FPS | 409 FPS |
| ultra | 229 FPS | 344 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen 7 7840H |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 696 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 696 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 696 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 696 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 696 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 696 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 696 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 631 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 619 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 553 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 496 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 434 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Ryzen 7 7840H

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 7 7840H
Ryzen 7 7840H
The Ryzen 7 7840H is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Janeiro 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Phoenix (2023−2024) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 5.1 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: FP8. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-5600. Passmark benchmark score: 27,832 points. Launch price was $299.
Processing Power
The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Ryzen 7 7840H offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Ryzen 7 7840H has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5.1 GHz on the Ryzen 7 7840H — a 17% clock advantage for the Ryzen 7 7840H (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.8 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Ryzen 7 7840H uses Phoenix (2023−2024) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Ryzen 7 7840H's 27,832 — a 72.5% lead for the Ryzen 7 7840H. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 16 MB (total) on the Ryzen 7 7840H.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen 7 7840H |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 8 / 16+33% |
| Boost Clock | 4.3 GHz | 5.1 GHz+19% |
| Base Clock | 2.9 GHz | 3.8 GHz+31% |
| 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) | Phoenix (2023−2024) |
| PassMark | 13,029 | 27,832+114% |
| 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 7840H uses FP8 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen 7 7840H |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1200 | FP8 |
| 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 7 7840H). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen 7 7840H |
|---|---|---|
| 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.











