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 i7-9700K

2018

Why buy it

✅Draws 95W instead of 125W, a 30W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Core i7-10700F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-10700F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 16,139).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 16 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 37.4 vs 52.1 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $310 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i7-10700F.

Core i7-10700F

2020

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +16.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Costs $75 less on MSRP ($310 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
✅Delivers 39.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 52.1 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($310 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Stock Cooler), unlike Core i7-9700K.

Trade-offs

❌31.6% higher power demand at 125W vs 95W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i7-9700K

2018

Core i7-10700F

2020

Why buy it

✅Draws 95W instead of 125W, a 30W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Core i7-10700F needs a discrete GPU.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +16.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Costs $75 less on MSRP ($310 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
✅Delivers 39.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 52.1 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($310 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Stock Cooler), unlike Core i7-9700K.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-10700F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 16,139).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 16 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 37.4 vs 52.1 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $310 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i7-10700F.

Trade-offs

❌31.6% higher power demand at 125W vs 95W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-10700F better than Core i7-9700K?

Yes. Core i7-10700F is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 16.9% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data, 12.1% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i7-10700F is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 16.9% 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, Core i7-10700F is the better fit. You are getting 12.1% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).

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

Core i7-10700F is the smarter buy today. Core i7-10700F is $75 cheaper on MSRP at $310 MSRP versus $385 MSRP, and it gives you a 16.9% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 39.2% better value on MSRP (52.1 vs 37.4 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

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

Core i7-10700F is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2020 vs 2018), 33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 8 cores / 16 threads instead of 8/8. That extra compute headroom should age better as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

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 i7-9700K Benchmark Check

Core i7-10700F Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Core i7-10700F
1080p
low	308 FPS	292 FPS
medium	278 FPS	259 FPS
high	231 FPS	219 FPS
ultra	182 FPS	188 FPS
1440p
low	270 FPS	239 FPS
medium	221 FPS	191 FPS
high	178 FPS	157 FPS
ultra	143 FPS	138 FPS
4K
low	170 FPS	166 FPS
medium	140 FPS	135 FPS
high	108 FPS	104 FPS
ultra	95 FPS	91 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Core i7-10700F

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Core i7-10700F
1080p
low	360 FPS	403 FPS
medium	321 FPS	403 FPS
high	291 FPS	403 FPS
ultra	259 FPS	363 FPS
1440p
low	324 FPS	403 FPS
medium	282 FPS	403 FPS
high	258 FPS	360 FPS
ultra	225 FPS	310 FPS
4K
low	249 FPS	349 FPS
medium	221 FPS	295 FPS
high	208 FPS	273 FPS
ultra	179 FPS	235 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Core i7-10700F

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Core i7-10700F
1080p
low	360 FPS	403 FPS
medium	360 FPS	403 FPS
high	360 FPS	403 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	403 FPS
1440p
low	360 FPS	403 FPS
medium	360 FPS	403 FPS
high	360 FPS	403 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	403 FPS
4K
low	360 FPS	403 FPS
medium	360 FPS	403 FPS
high	360 FPS	396 FPS
ultra	318 FPS	329 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Core i7-10700F

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Core i7-10700F
1080p
low	360 FPS	403 FPS
medium	360 FPS	403 FPS
high	360 FPS	403 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	403 FPS
1440p
low	360 FPS	403 FPS
medium	360 FPS	403 FPS
high	360 FPS	403 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	403 FPS
4K
low	360 FPS	403 FPS
medium	360 FPS	403 FPS
high	360 FPS	403 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	403 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Core i7-10700F

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-9700K and Core i7-10700F

Core i7-9700K

The Core i7-9700K is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 19 October 2018 (7 years ago). It is based on the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture. It features 8 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.9 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 14,397 points. Launch price was $374.

Core i7-10700F

The Core i7-10700F 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 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 2.9 GHz, with boost up to 4.8 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1200. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2933. Passmark benchmark score: 16,139 points. Launch price was $299.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-9700K packs 8 cores / 8 threads, matching the Core i7-10700F's 8 cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core i7-9700K versus 4.8 GHz on the Core i7-10700F — a 2.1% clock advantage for the Core i7-9700K (base: 3.6 GHz vs 2.9 GHz). The Core i7-9700K uses the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i7-10700F uses Comet Lake (2020−2025) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-9700K scores 14,397 against the Core i7-10700F's 16,139 — a 11.4% lead for the Core i7-10700F. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i7-9700K vs 16 MB (total) on the Core i7-10700F.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Core i7-10700F
Cores / Threads	8 / 8	8 / 16
Boost Clock	4.9 GHz+2%	4.8 GHz
Base Clock	3.6 GHz+24%	2.9 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	16 MB (total)+33%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256K (per core)
Process	14 nm	14 nm
Architecture	Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019)	Comet Lake (2020−2025)
PassMark	14,397	16,139+12%
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	12,000
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,250
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	7,800

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-9700K uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i7-10700F uses LGA1200 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR4-2666 memory speed. Both support up to 128 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: Intel 300 series (Core i7-9700K) and H410,B460,H470,Z490,Z590 (Core i7-10700F).

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Core i7-10700F
Socket	LGA1151	LGA1200
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	DDR4-2933
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	128 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Core i7-9700K has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i7-9700K) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i7-10700F). The Core i7-9700K includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), while the Core i7-10700F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-9700K targets Desktop, Core i7-10700F targets Gaming/Content Creation. Direct competitor: Core i7-10700F rivals Ryzen 5 5600X.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Core i7-10700F
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	UHD Graphics 630	None
Unlocked	Yes	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	Desktop	Gaming/Content Creation

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i7-9700K launched at $385 MSRP, while the Core i7-10700F debuted at $310. On MSRP ($385 vs $310), the Core i7-10700F is $75 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-9700K delivers 37.4 pts/$ vs 52.1 pts/$ for the Core i7-10700F — making the Core i7-10700F the 32.8% better value option.