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 $1,035 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $1,195 MSRP).
✅Delivers 99.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 40.8 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $1,195 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 190W, a 125W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon 6517P.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon 6517P across 24 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 48,810).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 72 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon 6517P, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 88 PCIe lanes.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Xeon 6517P moves to LGA4710 and DDR5.

Xeon 6517P

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +40.3% higher average FPS across 24 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+500% larger total L3 cache (72 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 88 PCIe lanes vs 16.
✅Newer platform on LGA4710 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
✅450% more PCIe lanes (88 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 40.8 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($1,195 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌192.3% higher power demand at 190W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Xeon 6517P

2025

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,035 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $1,195 MSRP).
✅Delivers 99.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 40.8 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $1,195 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 190W, a 125W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon 6517P.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +40.3% higher average FPS across 24 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+500% larger total L3 cache (72 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 88 PCIe lanes vs 16.
✅Newer platform on LGA4710 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
✅450% more PCIe lanes (88 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon 6517P across 24 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 48,810).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 72 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon 6517P, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 88 PCIe lanes.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Xeon 6517P moves to LGA4710 and DDR5.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 40.8 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($1,195 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌192.3% higher power demand at 190W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon 6517P better than Core i5-10400F?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon 6517P 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, Xeon 6517P is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 40.3% more average FPS across 24 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon 6517P is the better fit. You are getting 274.6% better PassMark, backed by 16 cores and 32 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 500% larger total L3 cache (72 MB vs 12 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Xeon 6517P is the smarter buy by a wide margin for a fresh build. Xeon 6517P is 646.9% more expensive on MSRP at $1,195 MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you a 40.3% average FPS lead across 24 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-10400F only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that is mostly used-market pricing on an obsolete 2020 platform. Even with 99.4% better value on paper (81.4 vs 40.8 PassMark/$), 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?

Xeon 6517P is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2020), a healthier platform with LGA4710 and DDR5 instead of LGA1200, 500% larger total L3 cache (72 MB vs 12 MB), more multi-core headroom with 16 cores / 32 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.

Core i5-10400F Benchmark Check

Xeon 6517P Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Xeon 6517P
1080p
low	192 FPS	192 FPS
medium	152 FPS	153 FPS
high	123 FPS	123 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	97 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	157 FPS
medium	119 FPS	122 FPS
high	97 FPS	95 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	76 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	72 FPS
medium	70 FPS	60 FPS
high	55 FPS	47 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	38 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Xeon 6517P

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Xeon 6517P
1080p
low	326 FPS	559 FPS
medium	318 FPS	488 FPS
high	290 FPS	396 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	353 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	483 FPS
medium	292 FPS	426 FPS
high	267 FPS	357 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	299 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	302 FPS
medium	258 FPS	270 FPS
high	235 FPS	244 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	220 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Xeon 6517P

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Xeon 6517P
1080p
low	326 FPS	1025 FPS
medium	326 FPS	986 FPS
high	326 FPS	910 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	824 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	859 FPS
medium	326 FPS	755 FPS
high	326 FPS	697 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	626 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	541 FPS
medium	326 FPS	442 FPS
high	289 FPS	389 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	319 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Xeon 6517P

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Xeon 6517P
1080p
low	326 FPS	1022 FPS
medium	326 FPS	916 FPS
high	326 FPS	782 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	672 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	788 FPS
medium	326 FPS	689 FPS
high	326 FPS	586 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	504 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	563 FPS
medium	326 FPS	501 FPS
high	326 FPS	441 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	377 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Xeon 6517P

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Xeon 6517P

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.

Xeon 6517P

The Xeon 6517P is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 February 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Granite Rapids (2024−2025) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 4.2 GHz. L3 cache: 72 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 3 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4710. Thermal design power (TDP): 190 Watt. Memory support: DDR5(6400MT/s). Passmark benchmark score: 48,810 points. Launch price was $1,195.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Xeon 6517P offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the Xeon 6517P has 10 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 4.2 GHz on the Xeon 6517P — a 2.4% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.2 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon 6517P uses Granite Rapids (2024−2025) (Intel 3 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Xeon 6517P's 48,810 — a 115.7% lead for the Xeon 6517P. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 72 MB (total) on the Xeon 6517P.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Xeon 6517P
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	16 / 32+167%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+2%	4.2 GHz
Base Clock	2.9 GHz	3.2 GHz+10%
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	72 MB (total)+500%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	2 MB (per core)+700%
Process	14 nm	Intel 3 nm-79%
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Granite Rapids (2024−2025)
PassMark	13,029	48,810+275%
Cinebench R23 Multi	8,191	—
Geekbench 6 Single	1,454	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	5,783	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon 6517P uses LGA4710 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus 6400 on the Xeon 6517P — the Xeon 6517P supports 199.8% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon 6517P supports up to 4096 of RAM compared to 128 GB — 187.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-10400F) vs 8 (Xeon 6517P). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 88 (Xeon 6517P) — the Xeon 6517P offers 72 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and Granite Rapids-SP (Xeon 6517P).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Xeon 6517P
Socket	LGA1200	LGA4710
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 5.0+67%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	6400+159900%
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB+3276700%	4096
RAM Channels	2	8+300%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	88+450%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the Xeon 6517P supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; Xeon 6517P rivals EPYC 9554.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Xeon 6517P
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	—	None
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	Gaming	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Xeon 6517P debuted at $1195. On MSRP ($160 vs $1195), the Core i5-10400F is $1035 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 40.8 pts/$ for the Xeon 6517P — making the Core i5-10400F the 66.4% better value option.