
Core i5-10400F
Popular choices:

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX
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
- ✅Costs $2,489 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $2,649 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 162.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 31.1 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $2,649 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 350W, a 285W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,191 vs 38,000).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX, which brings 24 cores / 48 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX moves to sTR5 and DDR5.
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX
2023Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +100.7% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 24 cores / 48 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅Newer platform on sTR5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
- ✅700% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 31.1 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($2,649 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ❌438.5% higher power demand at 350W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Core i5-10400F
2020Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX
2023Why buy it
- ✅Costs $2,489 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $2,649 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 162.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 31.1 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $2,649 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 350W, a 285W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +100.7% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 24 cores / 48 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅Newer platform on sTR5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
- ✅700% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,191 vs 38,000).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX, which brings 24 cores / 48 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX moves to sTR5 and DDR5.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 31.1 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($2,649 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ❌438.5% higher power demand at 350W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX 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 Threadripper PRO 7965WX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 192 FPS | 314 FPS |
| medium | 152 FPS | 290 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 241 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 203 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 278 FPS |
| medium | 119 FPS | 231 FPS |
| high | 97 FPS | 179 FPS |
| ultra | 79 FPS | 158 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 191 FPS |
| medium | 70 FPS | 158 FPS |
| high | 55 FPS | 121 FPS |
| ultra | 43 FPS | 107 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 816 FPS |
| medium | 318 FPS | 695 FPS |
| high | 290 FPS | 541 FPS |
| ultra | 253 FPS | 469 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 668 FPS |
| medium | 292 FPS | 593 FPS |
| high | 267 FPS | 476 FPS |
| ultra | 234 FPS | 386 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 309 FPS | 373 FPS |
| medium | 258 FPS | 336 FPS |
| high | 235 FPS | 307 FPS |
| ultra | 199 FPS | 269 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 893 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 724 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 650 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 553 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 716 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 581 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 509 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 428 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 509 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 420 FPS |
| high | 289 FPS | 376 FPS |
| ultra | 229 FPS | 312 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 1116 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 1002 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 879 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 792 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 873 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 769 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 675 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 588 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 637 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 568 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 505 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 437 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX

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 Threadripper PRO 7965WX
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX
The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 19 October 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Storm Peak (2023) architecture. It features 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 4.2 GHz, with boost up to 5.3 GHz. L3 cache: 128 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: sTR5. Thermal design power (TDP): 350 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 82,268 points. Launch price was $2,649.
Processing Power
The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX offers 24 cores / 48 threads — the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX has 18 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5.3 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX — a 20.8% clock advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX (base: 2.9 GHz vs 4.2 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX uses Storm Peak (2023) (5 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX's 82,268 — a 145.3% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 8,191 vs 38,000 (129.1% advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 2,686, a 59.5% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 5,783 vs 23,294 (120.4% advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX). L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 128 MB (total) on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 24 / 48+300% |
| Boost Clock | 4.3 GHz | 5.3 GHz+23% |
| Base Clock | 2.9 GHz | 4.2 GHz+45% |
| L3 Cache | 12 MB (total) | 128 MB (total)+967% |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 1 MB (per core)+300% |
| Process | 14 nm | 5 nm-64% |
| Architecture | Comet Lake (2020−2025) | Storm Peak (2023) |
| PassMark | 13,029 | 82,268+531% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 8,191 | 38,000+364% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,454 | 2,686+85% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 5,783 | 23,294+303% |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX uses sTR5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus DDR5-5200 on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX — the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX supports up to 2048 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 176.5% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-10400F) vs 8 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 128 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX) — the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX offers 112 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and WRX90,TRX50 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX).
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1200 | sTR5 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 4.0+33% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666 | DDR5-5200+25% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB | 2048 GB+1500% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 8+300% |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 128+700% |
Advanced Features
Only the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) vs true (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | No | Yes |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | true |
| Target Use | Gaming | — |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX debuted at $2649. On MSRP ($160 vs $2649), the Core i5-10400F is $2489 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 31.1 pts/$ for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX — making the Core i5-10400F the 89.6% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $160-94% | $2649 |
| Performance per Dollar | 81.4+162% | 31.1 |
| Release Date | 2020 | 2023 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.











