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 $2,839 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $2,999 MSRP).
✅Delivers 429.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 15.4 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $2,999 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 255W, a 190W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon W-3175X.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon W-3175X across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,191 vs 31,350).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 39 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3175X, which brings 28 cores / 56 threads and 48 PCIe lanes.

Xeon W-3175X

2018

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +77.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+220.8% larger total L3 cache (39 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 28 cores / 56 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 15.4 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($2,999 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌292.3% higher power demand at 255W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Xeon W-3175X

2018

Why buy it

✅Costs $2,839 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $2,999 MSRP).
✅Delivers 429.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 15.4 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $2,999 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 255W, a 190W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon W-3175X.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +77.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+220.8% larger total L3 cache (39 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 28 cores / 56 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 W-3175X across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,191 vs 31,350).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 39 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3175X, which brings 28 cores / 56 threads and 48 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.4 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($2,999 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌292.3% higher power demand at 255W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon W-3175X better than Core i5-10400F?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon W-3175X 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 W-3175X is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 77.9% more average FPS across 4 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon W-3175X is the better fit. You are getting 282.7% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 28 cores and 56 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 220.8% larger total L3 cache (39 MB vs 12 MB).

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

Xeon W-3175X is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-10400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Xeon W-3175X is 1774.4% more expensive on MSRP at $2,999 MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you a 77.9% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-10400F is also 429.5% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 15.4 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core i5-10400F is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2020 vs 2018). That makes it the safer long-term pick.

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 W-3175X Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Xeon W-3175X
1080p
low	192 FPS	195 FPS
medium	152 FPS	157 FPS
high	123 FPS	128 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	99 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	160 FPS
medium	119 FPS	125 FPS
high	97 FPS	97 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	77 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	73 FPS
medium	70 FPS	60 FPS
high	55 FPS	47 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	39 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Xeon W-3175X

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Xeon W-3175X
1080p
low	326 FPS	443 FPS
medium	318 FPS	387 FPS
high	290 FPS	316 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	260 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	382 FPS
medium	292 FPS	336 FPS
high	267 FPS	278 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	221 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	238 FPS
medium	258 FPS	211 FPS
high	235 FPS	187 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	154 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Xeon W-3175X

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Xeon W-3175X
1080p
low	326 FPS	1018 FPS
medium	326 FPS	908 FPS
high	326 FPS	877 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	790 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	734 FPS
medium	326 FPS	634 FPS
high	326 FPS	602 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	538 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	469 FPS
medium	326 FPS	369 FPS
high	289 FPS	329 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	270 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Xeon W-3175X

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Xeon W-3175X
1080p
low	326 FPS	938 FPS
medium	326 FPS	850 FPS
high	326 FPS	735 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	639 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	743 FPS
medium	326 FPS	650 FPS
high	326 FPS	559 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	479 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	536 FPS
medium	326 FPS	476 FPS
high	326 FPS	419 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	363 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Xeon W-3175X

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Xeon W-3175X

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 W-3175X

The Xeon W-3175X is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 19 December 2018 (6 years ago). It is based on the Skylake (server) (2017−2018) architecture. It features 28 cores and 56 threads. Base frequency is 3.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 38.5 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 255 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2666. Passmark benchmark score: 46,125 points. Launch price was $2,999.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Xeon W-3175X offers 28 cores / 56 threads — the Xeon W-3175X has 22 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 3.8 GHz on the Xeon W-3175X — a 12.3% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.1 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon W-3175X uses Skylake (server) (2017−2018) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Xeon W-3175X's 46,125 — a 111.9% lead for the Xeon W-3175X. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 8,191 vs 31,350 (117.1% advantage for the Xeon W-3175X). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 1,467, a 0.9% lead for the Xeon W-3175X that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 5,783 vs 17,358 (100% advantage for the Xeon W-3175X). L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 38.5 MB (total) on the Xeon W-3175X.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Xeon W-3175X
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	28 / 56+367%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+13%	3.8 GHz
Base Clock	2.9 GHz	3.1 GHz+7%
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	38.5 MB (total)+221%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	1 MB (per core)+300%
Process	14 nm	14 nm
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Skylake (server) (2017−2018)
PassMark	13,029	46,125+254%
Cinebench R23 Multi	8,191	31,350+283%
Geekbench 6 Single	1,454	1,467
Geekbench 6 Multi	5,783	17,358+200%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon W-3175X uses LGA3647 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR4-2666 memory speed. The Xeon W-3175X supports up to 512 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 120% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-10400F) vs 6 (Xeon W-3175X). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 48 (Xeon W-3175X) — the Xeon W-3175X offers 32 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and Intel C621 (Xeon W-3175X).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Xeon W-3175X
Socket	LGA1200	LGA3647
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	DDR4-2666
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	512 GB+300%
RAM Channels	2	6+200%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	48+200%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Xeon W-3175X has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Xeon W-3175X 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.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Xeon W-3175X
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	No	Yes
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 W-3175X debuted at $2999. On MSRP ($160 vs $2999), the Core i5-10400F is $2839 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 15.4 pts/$ for the Xeon W-3175X — making the Core i5-10400F the 136.5% better value option.