Core i5-10400F vs Ryzen 9 4900HS

CPU

GPU

Core i5-10400F

6 Cores12 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.3 GHz2020

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Ryzen 9 4900HS

8 Cores16 Thrd35 WWMax: 4.3 GHz2020

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i5-10400F

6 / 12

13,029

0.0%

18,793

+44.2%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX

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

✅+50% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB).
✅100% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen 9 4900HS.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 9 4900HS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 18,793).
❌Launch MSRP is still $160 MSRP, while Ryzen 9 4900HS mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Ryzen 9 4900HS can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Ryzen 9 4900HS

2020

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +25.1% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Vega 8, while Core i5-10400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 12 MB).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Ryzen 9 4900HS

2020

Why buy it

✅+50% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB).
✅100% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen 9 4900HS.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +25.1% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Vega 8, while Core i5-10400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 9 4900HS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 18,793).
❌Launch MSRP is still $160 MSRP, while Ryzen 9 4900HS mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Ryzen 9 4900HS can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 12 MB).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen 9 4900HS better than Core i5-10400F?

Yes. Ryzen 9 4900HS is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 25.1% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data, 44.2% better 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 4900HS is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 25.1% more average FPS across 4 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Ryzen 9 4900HS is the better fit. You are getting 44.2% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads.

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

Ryzen 9 4900HS is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-10400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Ryzen 9 4900HS is at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you a 25.1% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-10400F is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Ryzen 9 4900HS is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting more multi-core headroom with 8 cores / 16 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 4900HS Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 9 4900HS
1080p
low	192 FPS	173 FPS
medium	152 FPS	141 FPS
high	123 FPS	112 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	92 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	149 FPS
medium	119 FPS	119 FPS
high	97 FPS	95 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	77 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	81 FPS
medium	70 FPS	70 FPS
high	55 FPS	55 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	43 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 9 4900HS

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 9 4900HS
1080p
low	326 FPS	353 FPS
medium	318 FPS	293 FPS
high	290 FPS	258 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	225 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	303 FPS
medium	292 FPS	260 FPS
high	267 FPS	233 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	198 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	246 FPS
medium	258 FPS	218 FPS
high	235 FPS	197 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	171 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 9 4900HS

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 9 4900HS
1080p
low	326 FPS	470 FPS
medium	326 FPS	470 FPS
high	326 FPS	470 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	470 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	470 FPS
medium	326 FPS	470 FPS
high	326 FPS	468 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	415 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	461 FPS
medium	326 FPS	391 FPS
high	289 FPS	343 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	281 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 9 4900HS

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 9 4900HS
1080p
low	326 FPS	470 FPS
medium	326 FPS	470 FPS
high	326 FPS	470 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	470 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	470 FPS
medium	326 FPS	470 FPS
high	326 FPS	470 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	429 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	458 FPS
medium	326 FPS	415 FPS
high	326 FPS	363 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	310 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 9 4900HS

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Ryzen 9 4900HS

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 4900HS

The Ryzen 9 4900HS is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 7 March 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Renoir (Zen 2) (2020) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 4.3 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm process technology. Socket: FP6. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-4266. Passmark benchmark score: 18,793 points. Launch price was $299.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Ryzen 9 4900HS offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Ryzen 9 4900HS has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 4.3 GHz on the Ryzen 9 4900HS — identical boost frequencies (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Ryzen 9 4900HS uses Renoir (Zen 2) (2020) (7 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Ryzen 9 4900HS's 18,793 — a 36.2% lead for the Ryzen 9 4900HS. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 8 MB (total) on the Ryzen 9 4900HS.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 9 4900HS
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	8 / 16+33%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz	4.3 GHz
Base Clock	2.9 GHz	3 GHz+3%
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)+50%	8 MB (total)
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	512 kB (per core)+100%
Process	14 nm	7 nm-50%
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Renoir (Zen 2) (2020)
PassMark	13,029	18,793+44%
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 9 4900HS uses FP6 (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 8 (Ryzen 9 4900HS) — the Core i5-10400F offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 9 4900HS
Socket	LGA1200	FP6
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	LPDDR4-4266
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB+100%	64 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16+100%	8

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) vs AMD-V (Ryzen 9 4900HS). The Ryzen 9 4900HS includes integrated graphics (Vega 8), while the Core i5-10400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, Ryzen 9 4900HS targets Mobile High-End. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.