
Core i5-10400F
Popular choices:

Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U
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 PRO 7840U.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 24,531).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 16 MB).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $160 MSRP, while Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌712.5% higher power demand at 65W vs 8W.
Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U
2023Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +37.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Draws 8W instead of 65W, a 57W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FP7/FP8 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Core i5-10400F
2020Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U
2023Why buy it
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +37.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Draws 8W instead of 65W, a 57W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FP7/FP8 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 24,531).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 16 MB).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $160 MSRP, while Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌712.5% higher power demand at 65W vs 8W.
Trade-offs
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U 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 PRO 7840U |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 192 FPS | 259 FPS |
| medium | 152 FPS | 238 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 201 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 173 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 229 FPS |
| medium | 119 FPS | 191 FPS |
| high | 97 FPS | 155 FPS |
| ultra | 79 FPS | 137 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 159 FPS |
| medium | 70 FPS | 134 FPS |
| high | 55 FPS | 104 FPS |
| ultra | 43 FPS | 92 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 492 FPS |
| medium | 318 FPS | 408 FPS |
| high | 290 FPS | 356 FPS |
| ultra | 253 FPS | 319 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 430 FPS |
| medium | 292 FPS | 376 FPS |
| high | 267 FPS | 328 FPS |
| ultra | 234 FPS | 281 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 309 FPS | 284 FPS |
| medium | 258 FPS | 259 FPS |
| high | 235 FPS | 248 FPS |
| ultra | 199 FPS | 214 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 613 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 613 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 613 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 522 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 613 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 613 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 523 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 449 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 523 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 457 FPS |
| high | 289 FPS | 405 FPS |
| ultra | 229 FPS | 343 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 613 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 613 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 613 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 613 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 613 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 613 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 613 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 549 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 558 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 502 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 449 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 385 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U

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 PRO 7840U
Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U
The Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 3 May 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Phoenix (Zen 4) (2023) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.3 GHz, with boost up to 5.1 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB. L2 cache: 8 MB. Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: FP7/FP8. Thermal design power (TDP): 28 Watt. Memory support: LPDDR5x, DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 24,531 points. Launch price was $299.
Processing Power
The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5.1 GHz on the Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U — a 17% clock advantage for the Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.3 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U uses Phoenix (Zen 4) (2023) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U's 24,531 — a 61.2% lead for the Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 16 MB on the Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 8 / 16+33% |
| Boost Clock | 4.3 GHz | 5.1 GHz+19% |
| Base Clock | 2.9 GHz | 3.3 GHz+14% |
| L3 Cache | 12 MB (total) | 16 MB+33% |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 8 MB+3100% |
| Process | 14 nm | 4 nm-71% |
| Architecture | Comet Lake (2020−2025) | Phoenix (Zen 4) (2023) |
| PassMark | 13,029 | 24,531+88% |
| 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 PRO 7840U uses FP7/FP8 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1200 | FP7/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 PRO 7840U). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen 7 PRO 7840U |
|---|---|---|
| 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.











