Core i5-10400F vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX

Intel

Core i5-10400F

6 Cores12 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.3 GHz2020

Popular choices:

VS
AMD

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX

64 Cores128 Thrd350 WWMax: 5.4 GHz2025

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

2020

Why buy it

  • Costs $7,839 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $7,999 MSRP).
  • Delivers 322.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 19.3 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $7,999 MSRP).
  • Draws 65W instead of 350W, a 285W reduction.
  • Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX.

Trade-offs

  • Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
  • Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,191 vs 120,000).
  • Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX, which brings 64 cores / 128 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
  • Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX moves to sTR5 and DDR5.

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX

2025

Why buy it

  • Better for gaming: +92.7% higher average FPS across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
  • Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 64 cores / 128 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 19.3 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($7,999 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 9985WX better than Core i5-10400F?
Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i5-10400F is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.
Which one is better for gaming?
If gaming is the priority, Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 92.7% more average FPS across 6 shared CPU game tests. It also has a big cache advantage at 256 MB vs 12 MB.
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX is the better fit. You are getting 1365% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 64 cores and 128 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 2033.3% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 12 MB).
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX is the smarter buy by a wide margin for a fresh build. Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX is 4899.4% more expensive on MSRP at $7,999 MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you a 92.7% average FPS lead across 6 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-10400F only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that is mostly used-market pricing on an obsolete 2020 platform. Even with 322.0% better value on paper (81.4 vs 19.3 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a very cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA1200.
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2020), a healthier platform with sTR5 and DDR5 instead of LGA1200, 3D V-Cache and a much larger 256 MB L3 cache instead of 12 MB, more multi-core headroom with 64 cores / 128 threads instead of 6/12, and AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. That should give you a better long-term upgrade path for motherboard, RAM, and future CPU swaps.

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.

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

PresetCore i5-10400FRyzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX
1080p
low192 FPS303 FPS
medium152 FPS281 FPS
high123 FPS231 FPS
ultra100 FPS195 FPS
1440p
low153 FPS268 FPS
medium119 FPS224 FPS
high97 FPS172 FPS
ultra79 FPS152 FPS
4K
low82 FPS186 FPS
medium70 FPS155 FPS
high55 FPS117 FPS
ultra43 FPS105 FPS
Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

PresetCore i5-10400FRyzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX
1080p
low326 FPS803 FPS
medium318 FPS687 FPS
high290 FPS538 FPS
ultra253 FPS468 FPS
1440p
low326 FPS662 FPS
medium292 FPS590 FPS
high267 FPS477 FPS
ultra234 FPS386 FPS
4K
low309 FPS370 FPS
medium258 FPS334 FPS
high235 FPS308 FPS
ultra199 FPS269 FPS
League of Legends

League of Legends

PresetCore i5-10400FRyzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX
1080p
low326 FPS889 FPS
medium326 FPS728 FPS
high326 FPS654 FPS
ultra326 FPS556 FPS
1440p
low326 FPS693 FPS
medium326 FPS567 FPS
high326 FPS498 FPS
ultra326 FPS419 FPS
4K
low326 FPS490 FPS
medium326 FPS407 FPS
high289 FPS365 FPS
ultra229 FPS303 FPS
Valorant

Valorant

PresetCore i5-10400FRyzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX
1080p
low326 FPS1131 FPS
medium326 FPS1014 FPS
high326 FPS889 FPS
ultra326 FPS802 FPS
1440p
low326 FPS890 FPS
medium326 FPS783 FPS
high326 FPS688 FPS
ultra326 FPS599 FPS
4K
low326 FPS649 FPS
medium326 FPS579 FPS
high326 FPS514 FPS
ultra326 FPS437 FPS

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX

Intel

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.

AMD

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX

The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 23 July 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Shimada Peak (2025) architecture. It features 64 cores and 128 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 5.4 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: sTR5. Thermal design power (TDP): 350 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 154,361 points. Launch price was $7,999.

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX offers 64 cores / 128 threads — the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX has 58 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5.4 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX — a 22.7% clock advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.2 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX uses Shimada Peak (2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX's 154,361 — a 168.9% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 8,191 vs 120,000 (174.4% advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 3,644, a 85.9% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 5,783 vs 37,967 (147.1% advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX). L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 256 MB (total) on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX.

FeatureCore i5-10400FRyzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX
Cores / Threads
6 / 12
64 / 128+967%
Boost Clock
4.3 GHz
5.4 GHz+26%
Base Clock
2.9 GHz
3.2 GHz+10%
L3 Cache
12 MB (total)
256 MB (total)+2033%
L2 Cache
256K (per core)
1 MB (per core)+300%
Process
14 nm
4 nm-71%
Architecture
Comet Lake (2020−2025)
Shimada Peak (2025)
PassMark
13,029
154,361+1085%
Cinebench R23 Multi
8,191
120,000+1365%
Geekbench 6 Single
1,454
3,644+151%
Geekbench 6 Multi
5,783
37,967+557%
🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX uses sTR5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus DDR5-6400 on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX — the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX 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 9985WX). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 128 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX) — the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX 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 9985WX).

FeatureCore i5-10400FRyzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX
Socket
LGA1200
sTR5
PCIe Generation
PCIe 3.0
PCIe 4.0+33%
Max RAM Speed
DDR4-2666
DDR5-6400+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 9985WX 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 9985WX). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX targets High-end Workstation. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX rivals Xeon w9-3475X.

FeatureCore i5-10400FRyzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX
Integrated GPU
No
No
Unlocked
No
AVX-512
No
Yes
Virtualization
VT-x, VT-d
true
Target Use
Gaming
High-end Workstation
💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX debuted at $7999. On MSRP ($160 vs $7999), the Core i5-10400F is $7839 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 19.3 pts/$ for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX — making the Core i5-10400F the 123.4% better value option.

FeatureCore i5-10400FRyzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX
MSRP
$160-98%
$7999
Performance per Dollar
81.4+322%
19.3
Release Date
2020
2025