
Core i5-10400F
Popular choices:

Ryzen AI Max PRO 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
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen AI Max PRO 385.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 across 4 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 PRO 385 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
Ryzen AI Max PRO 385
2025Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +96.1% higher average FPS across 4 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
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Core i5-10400F
2020Ryzen AI Max PRO 385
2025Why buy it
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen AI Max PRO 385.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +96.1% higher average FPS across 4 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 PRO 385 across 4 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 PRO 385 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
Trade-offs
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen AI Max PRO 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 PRO 385 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 192 FPS | 277 FPS |
| medium | 152 FPS | 243 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 209 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 179 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 233 FPS |
| medium | 119 FPS | 185 FPS |
| high | 97 FPS | 153 FPS |
| ultra | 79 FPS | 134 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 162 FPS |
| medium | 70 FPS | 129 FPS |
| high | 55 FPS | 100 FPS |
| ultra | 43 FPS | 86 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 684 FPS |
| medium | 318 FPS | 565 FPS |
| high | 290 FPS | 460 FPS |
| ultra | 253 FPS | 417 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 591 FPS |
| medium | 292 FPS | 514 FPS |
| high | 267 FPS | 422 FPS |
| ultra | 234 FPS | 360 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 309 FPS | 352 FPS |
| medium | 258 FPS | 311 FPS |
| high | 235 FPS | 286 FPS |
| ultra | 199 FPS | 251 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 788 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 788 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 706 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 594 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 788 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 644 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 559 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 472 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 562 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 459 FPS |
| high | 289 FPS | 408 FPS |
| ultra | 229 FPS | 338 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 788 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 788 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 788 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 781 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 788 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 768 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 673 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 590 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 609 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 541 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 486 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 426 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Ryzen AI Max PRO 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 PRO 385
Ryzen AI Max PRO 385
The Ryzen AI Max PRO 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: 31,508 points. Launch price was $499.
Processing Power
The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5 GHz on the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 — a 15.1% clock advantage for the Ryzen AI Max PRO 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 PRO 385 uses Strix Halo (2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385's 31,508 — a 83% lead for the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 8,191 vs 16,500 (67.3% advantage for the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 2,886, a 66% lead for the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 5,783 vs 14,136 (83.9% advantage for the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385). L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 32 MB (total) on the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen AI Max PRO 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 | 31,508+142% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 8,191 | 16,500+101% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,454 | 2,886+98% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 5,783 | 14,136+144% |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 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 PRO 385 — the Ryzen AI Max PRO 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 8 (Ryzen AI Max PRO 385). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 20 (Ryzen AI Max PRO 385) — the Ryzen AI Max PRO 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 PRO 385).
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen AI Max PRO 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 | 8+300% |
| ECC Support | No | No |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 20+25% |
Advanced Features
Only the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Ryzen AI Max PRO 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 PRO 385). The Ryzen AI Max PRO 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 PRO 385 targets Enterprise AI Mobile. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 rivals M3 Max.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen AI Max PRO 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 | Enterprise AI Mobile |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.











