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 i7-10700KF

2020

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +31.3% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 8 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (18,380 vs 18,400).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 45.4 vs 61.3 PassMark/$ ($405 MSRP vs $300 MSRP).
❌635.3% higher power demand at 125W vs 17W.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 5 226V moves to FCBGA2833 and DDR5.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 5 226V can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core Ultra 5 226V

2024

Why buy it

✅+0.1% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $105 less on MSRP ($300 MSRP vs $405 MSRP).
✅Delivers 35.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 61.3 vs 45.4 PassMark/$ ($300 MSRP vs $405 MSRP).
✅Draws 17W instead of 125W, a 108W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA2833 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-10700KF across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 16 MB).

Core i7-10700KF

2020

Core Ultra 5 226V

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +31.3% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 8 MB).

Why buy it

✅+0.1% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $105 less on MSRP ($300 MSRP vs $405 MSRP).
✅Delivers 35.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 61.3 vs 45.4 PassMark/$ ($300 MSRP vs $405 MSRP).
✅Draws 17W instead of 125W, a 108W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA2833 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (18,380 vs 18,400).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 45.4 vs 61.3 PassMark/$ ($405 MSRP vs $300 MSRP).
❌635.3% higher power demand at 125W vs 17W.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 5 226V moves to FCBGA2833 and DDR5.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 5 226V can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-10700KF across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 16 MB).

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 5 226V better than Core i7-10700KF?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, Core i7-10700KF is ahead with a 31.3% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core Ultra 5 226V pulls ahead with 0.1% better PassMark. Core i7-10700KF also has the bigger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 8 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core Ultra 5 226V is the better fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 8 threads.

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

Core Ultra 5 226V is the smarter buy today. Core Ultra 5 226V is $105 cheaper on MSRP at $300 MSRP versus $405 MSRP, and it gives you 0.1% better PassMark. The trade-off is that Core i7-10700KF is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 31.3% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 35.1% better value on MSRP (61.3 vs 45.4 PassMark/$), 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 Ultra 5 226V is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2020), a healthier platform with FCBGA2833 and DDR5 instead of LGA1200, and more multi-core headroom with 8 cores / 8 threads instead of 8/16. 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 i7-10700KF Benchmark Check

Core Ultra 5 226V Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i7-10700KF	Core Ultra 5 226V
1080p
low	302 FPS	180 FPS
medium	265 FPS	145 FPS
high	223 FPS	117 FPS
ultra	191 FPS	97 FPS
1440p
low	247 FPS	148 FPS
medium	195 FPS	117 FPS
high	160 FPS	95 FPS
ultra	140 FPS	79 FPS
4K
low	170 FPS	83 FPS
medium	136 FPS	71 FPS
high	105 FPS	57 FPS
ultra	92 FPS	44 FPS

Open Core i7-10700KF Open Core Ultra 5 226V

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i7-10700KF	Core Ultra 5 226V
1080p
low	460 FPS	212 FPS
medium	460 FPS	176 FPS
high	457 FPS	158 FPS
ultra	407 FPS	139 FPS
1440p
low	460 FPS	181 FPS
medium	460 FPS	154 FPS
high	422 FPS	142 FPS
ultra	362 FPS	122 FPS
4K
low	400 FPS	137 FPS
medium	342 FPS	122 FPS
high	320 FPS	115 FPS
ultra	275 FPS	100 FPS

Open Core i7-10700KF Open Core Ultra 5 226V

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i7-10700KF	Core Ultra 5 226V
1080p
low	460 FPS	460 FPS
medium	460 FPS	460 FPS
high	460 FPS	460 FPS
ultra	460 FPS	460 FPS
1440p
low	460 FPS	460 FPS
medium	460 FPS	460 FPS
high	460 FPS	460 FPS
ultra	460 FPS	424 FPS
4K
low	460 FPS	460 FPS
medium	460 FPS	384 FPS
high	432 FPS	343 FPS
ultra	362 FPS	272 FPS

Open Core i7-10700KF Open Core Ultra 5 226V

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i7-10700KF	Core Ultra 5 226V
1080p
low	460 FPS	460 FPS
medium	460 FPS	460 FPS
high	460 FPS	460 FPS
ultra	460 FPS	460 FPS
1440p
low	460 FPS	460 FPS
medium	460 FPS	460 FPS
high	460 FPS	460 FPS
ultra	460 FPS	460 FPS
4K
low	460 FPS	460 FPS
medium	460 FPS	460 FPS
high	460 FPS	460 FPS
ultra	437 FPS	408 FPS

Open Core i7-10700KF Open Core Ultra 5 226V

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-10700KF and Core Ultra 5 226V

Core i7-10700KF

The Core i7-10700KF 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 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 5.1 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1200. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2933. Passmark benchmark score: 18,380 points. Launch price was $299.

Core Ultra 5 226V

The Core Ultra 5 226V is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 September 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Lunar Lake (2024) architecture. It features 8 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 4.5 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 2.5 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2833. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 18,400 points. Launch price was $299.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-10700KF packs 8 cores / 16 threads, matching the Core Ultra 5 226V's 8 cores. Boost clocks reach 5.1 GHz on the Core i7-10700KF versus 4.5 GHz on the Core Ultra 5 226V — a 12.5% clock advantage for the Core i7-10700KF (base: 3.8 GHz vs 2.1 GHz). The Core i7-10700KF uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Core Ultra 5 226V uses Lunar Lake (2024) (3 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-10700KF scores 18,380 against the Core Ultra 5 226V's 18,400 — a 0.1% lead for the Core Ultra 5 226V. L3 cache: 16 MB (total) on the Core i7-10700KF vs 8 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 5 226V.

Feature	Core i7-10700KF	Core Ultra 5 226V
Cores / Threads	8 / 16	8 / 8
Boost Clock	5.1 GHz+13%	4.5 GHz
Base Clock	3.8 GHz+81%	2.1 GHz
L3 Cache	16 MB (total)+100%	8 MB (total)
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	2.5 MB (per core)+900%
Process	14 nm	3 nm-79%
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Lunar Lake (2024)
PassMark	18,380	18,400
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	9,041
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,962
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	1,898

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-10700KF uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core Ultra 5 226V uses FCBGA2833 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i7-10700KF	Core Ultra 5 226V
Socket	LGA1200	FCBGA2833
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	—	LPDDR5X-8533
Max RAM Capacity	—	16 GB
RAM Channels	—	2
ECC Support	—	No
PCIe Lanes	—	8

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Core i7-10700KF) / VT-x, VT-d (Core Ultra 5 226V). The Core Ultra 5 226V includes integrated graphics (Arc 130V), while the Core i7-10700KF requires a dedicated GPU.

Feature	Core i7-10700KF	Core Ultra 5 226V
Integrated GPU	—	Yes
IGPU Model	—	Arc 130V
Unlocked	—	No
AVX-512	—	Yes
Virtualization	—	VT-x, VT-d

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i7-10700KF launched at $405 MSRP, while the Core Ultra 5 226V debuted at $300. On MSRP ($405 vs $300), the Core Ultra 5 226V is $105 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-10700KF delivers 45.4 pts/$ vs 61.3 pts/$ for the Core Ultra 5 226V — making the Core Ultra 5 226V the 29.9% better value option.