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 $339 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $499 MSRP).
✅Delivers 25.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 65.2 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $499 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 105W, a 40W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen 9 3900XT.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 9 3900XT across 7 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,191 vs 18,400).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 64 MB).

Ryzen 9 3900XT

2020

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +65.1% higher average FPS across 7 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+433.3% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 12 MB).
✅50% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 65.2 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($499 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 9 3900XT

2020

Why buy it

✅Costs $339 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $499 MSRP).
✅Delivers 25.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 65.2 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $499 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 105W, a 40W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen 9 3900XT.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +65.1% higher average FPS across 7 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+433.3% larger total L3 cache (64 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 9 3900XT across 7 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,191 vs 18,400).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 64 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 65.2 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($499 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 9 3900XT better than Core i5-10400F?

Yes. Ryzen 9 3900XT is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 65.1% average FPS lead across 7 shared CPU game tests in our data, 124.6% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, 149.5% higher PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Ryzen 9 3900XT is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 65.1% more average FPS across 7 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Ryzen 9 3900XT is the better fit. You are getting 124.6% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 12 cores and 24 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 433.3% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 12 MB).

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

Ryzen 9 3900XT is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-10400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Ryzen 9 3900XT is 211.9% more expensive on MSRP at $499 MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you a 65.1% average FPS lead across 7 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-10400F is also 25.0% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 65.2 PassMark/$), 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?

Ryzen 9 3900XT is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting 433.3% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 12 MB) and more multi-core headroom with 12 cores / 24 threads instead of 6/12. 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 9 3900XT Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 9 3900XT
1080p
low	192 FPS	177 FPS
medium	152 FPS	148 FPS
high	123 FPS	130 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	108 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	158 FPS
medium	119 FPS	126 FPS
high	97 FPS	104 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	86 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	88 FPS
medium	70 FPS	75 FPS
high	55 FPS	60 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	48 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 9 3900XT

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 9 3900XT
1080p
low	326 FPS	681 FPS
medium	318 FPS	578 FPS
high	290 FPS	433 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	372 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	562 FPS
medium	292 FPS	487 FPS
high	267 FPS	386 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	309 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	332 FPS
medium	258 FPS	290 FPS
high	235 FPS	253 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	217 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 9 3900XT

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 9 3900XT
1080p
low	326 FPS	813 FPS
medium	326 FPS	644 FPS
high	326 FPS	557 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	463 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	725 FPS
medium	326 FPS	564 FPS
high	326 FPS	487 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	410 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	515 FPS
medium	326 FPS	422 FPS
high	289 FPS	374 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	310 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 9 3900XT

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 9 3900XT
1080p
low	326 FPS	813 FPS
medium	326 FPS	813 FPS
high	326 FPS	813 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	756 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	813 FPS
medium	326 FPS	769 FPS
high	326 FPS	675 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	578 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	635 FPS
medium	326 FPS	566 FPS
high	326 FPS	501 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	432 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 9 3900XT

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Ryzen 9 3900XT

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 9 3900XT

The Ryzen 9 3900XT is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 7 July 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Matisse 2 (2020) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 4.7 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 7 nm, 12 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 105 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 32,512 points. Launch price was $499.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Ryzen 9 3900XT offers 12 cores / 24 threads — the Ryzen 9 3900XT has 6 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 4.7 GHz on the Ryzen 9 3900XT — a 8.9% clock advantage for the Ryzen 9 3900XT (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.8 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Ryzen 9 3900XT uses Matisse 2 (2020) (7 nm, 12 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Ryzen 9 3900XT's 32,512 — a 85.6% lead for the Ryzen 9 3900XT. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 8,191 vs 18,400 (76.8% advantage for the Ryzen 9 3900XT). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 1,750, a 18.5% lead for the Ryzen 9 3900XT that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 5,783 vs 10,500 (57.9% advantage for the Ryzen 9 3900XT). L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 64 MB on the Ryzen 9 3900XT.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 9 3900XT
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	12 / 24+100%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz	4.7 GHz+9%
Base Clock	2.9 GHz	3.8 GHz+31%
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	64 MB+433%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	512K (per core)+100%
Process	14 nm	7 nm, 12 nm-50%
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Matisse 2 (2020)
PassMark	13,029	32,512+150%
Cinebench R23 Multi	8,191	18,400+125%
Geekbench 6 Single	1,454	1,750+20%
Geekbench 6 Multi	5,783	10,500+82%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Ryzen 9 3900XT uses AM4 (PCIe 4.0) — 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 9 3900XT) — the Ryzen 9 3900XT offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and X570,B550,X470,B450 (Ryzen 9 3900XT).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 9 3900XT
Socket	LGA1200	AM4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 4.0+33%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	DDR4-3200
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	128 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	24+50%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Ryzen 9 3900XT 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 9 3900XT). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, Ryzen 9 3900XT targets Workstation / Enthusiast Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; Ryzen 9 3900XT rivals Core i9-10900K.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 9 3900XT
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	No	Yes
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	AMD-V
Target Use	Gaming	Workstation / Enthusiast Gaming

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Ryzen 9 3900XT debuted at $499. On MSRP ($160 vs $499), the Core i5-10400F is $339 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 65.2 pts/$ for the Ryzen 9 3900XT — making the Core i5-10400F the 22.2% better value option.