
Core i5-10400F
Popular choices:

Ryzen AI Max 385
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 AI Max 385 across 7 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,191 vs 16,500).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 32 MB).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $160 MSRP, while Ryzen AI Max 385 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
Ryzen AI Max 385
2025Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +62.7% higher average FPS across 7 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+166.7% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Draws 55W instead of 65W, a 10W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FP11 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 AI Max 385
2025Why buy it
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +62.7% higher average FPS across 7 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+166.7% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Draws 55W instead of 65W, a 10W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FP11 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 AI Max 385 across 7 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,191 vs 16,500).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 32 MB).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $160 MSRP, while Ryzen AI Max 385 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
Trade-offs
- ❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen AI Max 385 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 AI Max 385 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 192 FPS | 257 FPS |
| medium | 152 FPS | 234 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 203 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 174 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 222 FPS |
| medium | 119 FPS | 183 FPS |
| high | 97 FPS | 153 FPS |
| ultra | 79 FPS | 134 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 154 FPS |
| medium | 70 FPS | 127 FPS |
| high | 55 FPS | 99 FPS |
| ultra | 43 FPS | 86 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen AI Max 385 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 592 FPS |
| medium | 318 FPS | 500 FPS |
| high | 290 FPS | 391 FPS |
| ultra | 253 FPS | 346 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 508 FPS |
| medium | 292 FPS | 452 FPS |
| high | 267 FPS | 359 FPS |
| ultra | 234 FPS | 299 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 309 FPS | 303 FPS |
| medium | 258 FPS | 273 FPS |
| high | 235 FPS | 243 FPS |
| ultra | 199 FPS | 209 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen AI Max 385 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 780 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 611 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 534 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 447 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 676 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 534 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 463 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 389 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 476 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 394 FPS |
| high | 289 FPS | 350 FPS |
| ultra | 229 FPS | 288 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen AI Max 385 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 807 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 807 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 779 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 700 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 796 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 706 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 619 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 536 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 554 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 499 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 448 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 389 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Ryzen AI Max 385

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 AI Max 385
Ryzen AI Max 385
The Ryzen AI Max 385 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 6 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Strix Halo (2025) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 5 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: FP11. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 32,274 points. Launch price was $499.
Processing Power
The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Ryzen AI Max 385 offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Ryzen AI Max 385 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5 GHz on the Ryzen AI Max 385 — a 15.1% clock advantage for the Ryzen AI Max 385 (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.6 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Ryzen AI Max 385 uses Strix Halo (2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Ryzen AI Max 385's 32,274 — a 85% lead for the Ryzen AI Max 385. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 8,191 vs 16,500 (67.3% advantage for the Ryzen AI Max 385). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 2,800, a 63.3% lead for the Ryzen AI Max 385 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 5,783 vs 14,000 (83.1% advantage for the Ryzen AI Max 385). L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 32 MB (total) on the Ryzen AI Max 385.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen AI Max 385 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 8 / 16+33% |
| Boost Clock | 4.3 GHz | 5 GHz+16% |
| Base Clock | 2.9 GHz | 3.6 GHz+24% |
| L3 Cache | 12 MB (total) | 32 MB (total)+167% |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 1 MB (per core)+300% |
| Process | 14 nm | 4 nm-71% |
| Architecture | Comet Lake (2020−2025) | Strix Halo (2025) |
| PassMark | 13,029 | 32,274+148% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 8,191 | 16,500+101% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,454 | 2,800+93% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 5,783 | 14,000+142% |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Ryzen AI Max 385 uses FP11 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus LPDDR5x-8000 on the Ryzen AI Max 385 — the Ryzen AI Max 385 supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 128 GB of RAM. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-10400F) vs 4 (Ryzen AI Max 385). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 20 (Ryzen AI Max 385) — the Ryzen AI Max 385 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and Strix Halo platform (Ryzen AI Max 385).
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen AI Max 385 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1200 | FP11 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 4.0+33% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666 | LPDDR5x-8000+25% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB | 128 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 4+100% |
| ECC Support | No | No |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 20+25% |
Advanced Features
Only the Ryzen AI Max 385 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Ryzen AI Max 385 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) vs AMD-V (Ryzen AI Max 385). The Ryzen AI Max 385 includes integrated graphics (Radeon 8050S), while the Core i5-10400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, Ryzen AI Max 385 targets High-performance AI / Gaming Laptop. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; Ryzen AI Max 385 rivals Core Ultra 9 285H.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen AI Max 385 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Radeon 8050S |
| Unlocked | No | Yes |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | AMD-V |
| Target Use | Gaming | High-performance AI / Gaming Laptop |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Ryzen AI Max 385 debuted at $0. On MSRP ($160 vs $0), the Ryzen AI Max 385 is $160 cheaper.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen AI Max 385 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $160 | $0-100% |
| Performance per Dollar | 81.4 | — |
| Release Date | 2020 | 2025 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.











