
Core i5-10400F
Popular choices:

Xeon E5-2683 v3
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
- ✅Better for gaming: +4.5% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 120W, a 55W reduction.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon E5-2683 v3.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 14,686).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 35 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2683 v3, which brings 14 cores / 28 threads.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $160 MSRP, while Xeon E5-2683 v3 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
Xeon E5-2683 v3
2014Why buy it
- ✅+12.7% higher PassMark.
- ✅+191.7% larger total L3 cache (35 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 14 cores / 28 threads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌84.6% higher power demand at 120W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Core i5-10400F
2020Xeon E5-2683 v3
2014Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +4.5% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 120W, a 55W reduction.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon E5-2683 v3.
Why buy it
- ✅+12.7% higher PassMark.
- ✅+191.7% larger total L3 cache (35 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 14 cores / 28 threads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 14,686).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 35 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2683 v3, which brings 14 cores / 28 threads.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $160 MSRP, while Xeon E5-2683 v3 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌84.6% higher power demand at 120W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i5-10400F better than Xeon E5-2683 v3?
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 | Xeon E5-2683 v3 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 192 FPS | 174 FPS |
| medium | 152 FPS | 151 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 119 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 96 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 146 FPS |
| medium | 119 FPS | 123 FPS |
| high | 97 FPS | 94 FPS |
| ultra | 79 FPS | 76 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 68 FPS |
| medium | 70 FPS | 61 FPS |
| high | 55 FPS | 47 FPS |
| ultra | 43 FPS | 38 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Xeon E5-2683 v3 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 212 FPS |
| medium | 318 FPS | 193 FPS |
| high | 290 FPS | 164 FPS |
| ultra | 253 FPS | 132 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 183 FPS |
| medium | 292 FPS | 166 FPS |
| high | 267 FPS | 143 FPS |
| ultra | 234 FPS | 112 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 309 FPS | 115 FPS |
| medium | 258 FPS | 106 FPS |
| high | 235 FPS | 94 FPS |
| ultra | 199 FPS | 74 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Xeon E5-2683 v3 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 367 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 367 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 367 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 367 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 367 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 367 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 367 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 367 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 367 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 358 FPS |
| high | 289 FPS | 323 FPS |
| ultra | 229 FPS | 269 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Xeon E5-2683 v3 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 367 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 367 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 367 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 367 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 367 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 367 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 367 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 367 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 367 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 367 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 367 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 358 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Xeon E5-2683 v3

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.

Xeon E5-2683 v3
Xeon E5-2683 v3
The Xeon E5-2683 v3 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Haswell-EP (2014−2015) architecture. It features 14 cores and 28 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 35 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 120 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133. Passmark benchmark score: 14,686 points. Launch price was $800.
Processing Power
The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Xeon E5-2683 v3 offers 14 cores / 28 threads — the Xeon E5-2683 v3 has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 3 GHz on the Xeon E5-2683 v3 — a 35.6% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.9 GHz vs 2 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon E5-2683 v3 uses Haswell-EP (2014−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Xeon E5-2683 v3's 14,686 — a 12% lead for the Xeon E5-2683 v3. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 35 MB (total) on the Xeon E5-2683 v3.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Xeon E5-2683 v3 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 14 / 28+133% |
| Boost Clock | 4.3 GHz+43% | 3 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.9 GHz+45% | 2 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 12 MB (total) | 35 MB (total)+192% |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 256K (per core) |
| Process | 14 nm-36% | 22 nm |
| Architecture | Comet Lake (2020−2025) | Haswell-EP (2014−2015) |
| PassMark | 13,029 | 14,686+13% |
| 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 E5-2683 v3 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Xeon E5-2683 v3 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1200 | LGA2011 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 4.0+33% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 2 | — |
| ECC Support | No | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | — |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) / not specified (Xeon E5-2683 v3). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Xeon E5-2683 v3 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | — |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | — |
| Target Use | Gaming | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












