
Core i5-10400F
Popular choices:

Ryzen 9 7940HS
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
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 9 7940HS across 7 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,191 vs 17,443).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 16 MB).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $160 MSRP, while Ryzen 9 7940HS mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.
Ryzen 9 7940HS
2023Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +76.0% higher average FPS across 7 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.
- ✅25% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.
Core i5-10400F
2020Ryzen 9 7940HS
2023Why buy it
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +76.0% higher average FPS across 7 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.
- ✅25% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 9 7940HS across 7 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,191 vs 17,443).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 16 MB).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $160 MSRP, while Ryzen 9 7940HS mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.
Trade-offs
- ❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen 9 7940HS 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 9 7940HS |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 192 FPS | 267 FPS |
| medium | 152 FPS | 242 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 203 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 176 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 235 FPS |
| medium | 119 FPS | 193 FPS |
| high | 97 FPS | 157 FPS |
| ultra | 79 FPS | 139 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 163 FPS |
| medium | 70 FPS | 136 FPS |
| high | 55 FPS | 105 FPS |
| ultra | 43 FPS | 92 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen 9 7940HS |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 497 FPS |
| medium | 318 FPS | 408 FPS |
| high | 290 FPS | 349 FPS |
| ultra | 253 FPS | 311 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 434 FPS |
| medium | 292 FPS | 376 FPS |
| high | 267 FPS | 322 FPS |
| ultra | 234 FPS | 274 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 309 FPS | 286 FPS |
| medium | 258 FPS | 259 FPS |
| high | 235 FPS | 243 FPS |
| ultra | 199 FPS | 209 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen 9 7940HS |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 750 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 750 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 730 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 624 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 750 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 646 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 545 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 467 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 544 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 475 FPS |
| high | 289 FPS | 422 FPS |
| ultra | 229 FPS | 357 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen 9 7940HS |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 750 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 750 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 750 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 750 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 750 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 750 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 658 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 573 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 574 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 511 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 456 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 394 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Ryzen 9 7940HS

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 9 7940HS
Ryzen 9 7940HS
The Ryzen 9 7940HS is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Janeiro 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Phoenix-HS (Zen 4) (2023) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 4 GHz, with boost up to 5.2 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. Passmark benchmark score: 29,986 points. Launch price was $299.
Processing Power
The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Ryzen 9 7940HS offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Ryzen 9 7940HS has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5.2 GHz on the Ryzen 9 7940HS — a 18.9% clock advantage for the Ryzen 9 7940HS (base: 2.9 GHz vs 4 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Ryzen 9 7940HS uses Phoenix-HS (Zen 4) (2023) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Ryzen 9 7940HS's 29,986 — a 78.8% lead for the Ryzen 9 7940HS. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 8,191 vs 17,443 (72.2% advantage for the Ryzen 9 7940HS). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 2,646, a 58.1% lead for the Ryzen 9 7940HS that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 5,783 vs 11,591 (66.9% advantage for the Ryzen 9 7940HS). L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 16 MB (total) on the Ryzen 9 7940HS.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen 9 7940HS |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 8 / 16+33% |
| Boost Clock | 4.3 GHz | 5.2 GHz+21% |
| Base Clock | 2.9 GHz | 4 GHz+38% |
| 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-HS (Zen 4) (2023) |
| PassMark | 13,029 | 29,986+130% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 8,191 | 17,443+113% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,454 | 2,646+82% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 5,783 | 11,591+100% |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Ryzen 9 7940HS uses FP8 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus DDR5-5600 on the Ryzen 9 7940HS — the Ryzen 9 7940HS supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Ryzen 9 7940HS supports up to 256 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 20 (Ryzen 9 7940HS) — the Ryzen 9 7940HS offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and FP8,FP7 (Ryzen 9 7940HS).
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen 9 7940HS |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1200 | FP8 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 4.0+33% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666 | DDR5-5600+25% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB | 256 GB+100% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 20+25% |
Advanced Features
Only the Ryzen 9 7940HS has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Ryzen 9 7940HS supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) vs AMD-V (Ryzen 9 7940HS). The Ryzen 9 7940HS includes integrated graphics (Radeon 780M), while the Core i5-10400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, Ryzen 9 7940HS targets Thin-and-light Performance. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; Ryzen 9 7940HS rivals Core i9-13900H.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen 9 7940HS |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Radeon 780M |
| Unlocked | No | Yes |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | AMD-V |
| Target Use | Gaming | Thin-and-light Performance |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.











