
Core i5-10400F
Popular choices:

Xeon Platinum 8160M
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 $4,840 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $5,000 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 665.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 10.6 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $5,000 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 150W, a 85W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon Platinum 8160M.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon Platinum 8160M across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (5,783 vs 15,000).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 33 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon Platinum 8160M, which brings 24 cores / 48 threads and 48 PCIe lanes.
Xeon Platinum 8160M
2017Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +15.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+175% larger total L3 cache (33 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 24 cores / 48 threads, plus 48 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅200% more PCIe lanes (48 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.6 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($5,000 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ❌130.8% higher power demand at 150W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Core i5-10400F
2020Xeon Platinum 8160M
2017Why buy it
- ✅Costs $4,840 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $5,000 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 665.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 10.6 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $5,000 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 150W, a 85W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon Platinum 8160M.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +15.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+175% larger total L3 cache (33 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 24 cores / 48 threads, plus 48 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅200% more PCIe lanes (48 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon Platinum 8160M across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (5,783 vs 15,000).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 33 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon Platinum 8160M, which brings 24 cores / 48 threads and 48 PCIe lanes.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.6 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($5,000 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ❌130.8% higher power demand at 150W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Xeon Platinum 8160M 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 | Xeon Platinum 8160M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 192 FPS | 195 FPS |
| medium | 152 FPS | 158 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 128 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 100 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 157 FPS |
| medium | 119 FPS | 123 FPS |
| high | 97 FPS | 96 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 |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Xeon Platinum 8160M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 212 FPS |
| medium | 318 FPS | 188 FPS |
| high | 290 FPS | 161 FPS |
| ultra | 253 FPS | 137 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 184 FPS |
| medium | 292 FPS | 167 FPS |
| high | 267 FPS | 143 FPS |
| ultra | 234 FPS | 120 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 309 FPS | 120 FPS |
| medium | 258 FPS | 109 FPS |
| high | 235 FPS | 100 FPS |
| ultra | 199 FPS | 82 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Xeon Platinum 8160M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 894 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 779 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 736 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 652 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 710 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 610 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 576 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 508 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 458 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 360 FPS |
| high | 289 FPS | 320 FPS |
| ultra | 229 FPS | 260 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Xeon Platinum 8160M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 848 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 767 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 670 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 583 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 679 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 593 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 515 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 442 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 477 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 427 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 381 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 330 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Xeon Platinum 8160M

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 Platinum 8160M
Xeon Platinum 8160M
The Xeon Platinum 8160M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 25 April 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Skylake (server) (2017−2018) architecture. It features 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 33 MB. L2 cache: 24 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 150 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2666. Passmark benchmark score: 53,158 points. Launch price was $7,704.
Processing Power
The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Xeon Platinum 8160M offers 24 cores / 48 threads — the Xeon Platinum 8160M has 18 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 3.7 GHz on the Xeon Platinum 8160M — a 15% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.9 GHz vs 2.1 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon Platinum 8160M uses Skylake (server) (2017−2018) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Xeon Platinum 8160M's 53,158 — a 121.3% lead for the Xeon Platinum 8160M. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 850, a 52.4% lead for the Core i5-10400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 5,783 vs 15,000 (88.7% advantage for the Xeon Platinum 8160M). L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 33 MB on the Xeon Platinum 8160M.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Xeon Platinum 8160M |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 24 / 48+300% |
| Boost Clock | 4.3 GHz+16% | 3.7 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.9 GHz+38% | 2.1 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 12 MB (total) | 33 MB+175% |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 24 MB+9500% |
| Process | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Architecture | Comet Lake (2020−2025) | Skylake (server) (2017−2018) |
| PassMark | 13,029 | 53,158+308% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 8,191 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,454+71% | 850 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 5,783 | 15,000+159% |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon Platinum 8160M uses LGA3647 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR4-2666 memory speed. The Xeon Platinum 8160M supports up to 1536 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 169.2% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-10400F) vs 6 (Xeon Platinum 8160M). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 48 (Xeon Platinum 8160M) — the Xeon Platinum 8160M offers 32 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and C621 (Xeon Platinum 8160M).
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Xeon Platinum 8160M |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1200 | LGA3647 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666 | DDR4-2666 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB | 1536 GB+1100% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 6+200% |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 48+200% |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the Xeon Platinum 8160M 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, Xeon Platinum 8160M targets Datacenter. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; Xeon Platinum 8160M rivals EPYC 7401.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Xeon Platinum 8160M |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | Datacenter |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Xeon Platinum 8160M debuted at $5000. On MSRP ($160 vs $5000), the Core i5-10400F is $4840 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 10.6 pts/$ for the Xeon Platinum 8160M — making the Core i5-10400F the 153.8% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Xeon Platinum 8160M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $160-97% | $5000 |
| Performance per Dollar | 81.4+668% | 10.6 |
| Release Date | 2020 | 2017 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












