Core i5-10400F vs Ryzen 3 3100

CPU

GPU

Core i5-10400F

6 Cores12 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.3 GHz2020

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Ryzen 3 3100

4 Cores8 Thrd65 WWMax: 3.9 GHz2020

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i5-10400F

6 / 12

13,029

+9.2%

11,928

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

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

2020

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +8.0% higher average FPS across 5 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen 3 3100.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 16 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 81.4 vs 120.5 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $99 MSRP).

Ryzen 3 3100

2020

Why buy it

✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Costs $61 less on MSRP ($99 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
✅Delivers 48.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 120.5 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($99 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
✅50% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 5 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (11,928 vs 13,029).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Ryzen 3 3100

2020

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +8.0% higher average FPS across 5 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen 3 3100.

Why buy it

✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Costs $61 less on MSRP ($99 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
✅Delivers 48.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 120.5 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($99 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
✅50% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 16 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 81.4 vs 120.5 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $99 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-10400F across 5 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (11,928 vs 13,029).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-10400F better than Ryzen 3 3100?

Yes. Core i5-10400F is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 8.0% average FPS lead across 5 shared CPU game tests in our data, 9.2% 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 i5-10400F is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 8.0% more average FPS across 5 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i5-10400F is the better fit. You are getting 9.2% better PassMark, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads.

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

Core i5-10400F is the smarter buy by a wide margin for a fresh build. Core i5-10400F is 61.6% more expensive on MSRP at $160 MSRP versus $99 MSRP, and it gives you a 8.0% average FPS lead across 5 shared CPU game tests in our data. Ryzen 3 3100 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is so cheap, but its absolute performance tier is too low to be the smarter recommendation now. At roughly 11,928 PassMark with 4 cores and 8 threads, it only makes sense as a bare-minimum stopgap or a very constrained existing-platform upgrade.

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 more multi-core headroom with 6 cores / 12 threads instead of 4/8. 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 i5-10400F Benchmark Check

Ryzen 3 3100 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 3 3100
1080p
low	192 FPS	166 FPS
medium	152 FPS	136 FPS
high	123 FPS	118 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	93 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	144 FPS
medium	119 FPS	115 FPS
high	97 FPS	94 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	72 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	68 FPS
medium	70 FPS	58 FPS
high	55 FPS	46 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	36 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 3 3100

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 3 3100
1080p
low	326 FPS	271 FPS
medium	318 FPS	228 FPS
high	290 FPS	191 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	147 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	231 FPS
medium	292 FPS	200 FPS
high	267 FPS	169 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	133 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	165 FPS
medium	258 FPS	148 FPS
high	235 FPS	118 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	89 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 3 3100

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 3 3100
1080p
low	326 FPS	298 FPS
medium	326 FPS	298 FPS
high	326 FPS	298 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	298 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	298 FPS
medium	326 FPS	298 FPS
high	326 FPS	298 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	298 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	298 FPS
medium	326 FPS	268 FPS
high	289 FPS	226 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	179 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 3 3100

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 3 3100
1080p
low	326 FPS	298 FPS
medium	326 FPS	298 FPS
high	326 FPS	298 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	298 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	298 FPS
medium	326 FPS	298 FPS
high	326 FPS	298 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	298 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	298 FPS
medium	326 FPS	298 FPS
high	326 FPS	298 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	298 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 3 3100

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Ryzen 3 3100

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.

Ryzen 3 3100

The Ryzen 3 3100 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 24 April 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 3.9 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB (total). L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 7 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 11,928 points. Launch price was $99.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Ryzen 3 3100 offers 4 cores / 8 threads — the Core i5-10400F has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 3.9 GHz on the Ryzen 3 3100 — a 9.8% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.6 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Ryzen 3 3100 uses Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020) (7 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Ryzen 3 3100's 11,928 — a 8.8% lead for the Core i5-10400F. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 16 MB (total) on the Ryzen 3 3100.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 3 3100
Cores / Threads	6 / 12+50%	4 / 8
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+10%	3.9 GHz
Base Clock	2.9 GHz	3.6 GHz+24%
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	16 MB (total)+33%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	512K (per core)+100%
Process	14 nm	7 nm-50%
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)
PassMark	13,029+9%	11,928
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 Ryzen 3 3100 uses AM4 (PCIe 4.0) — 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. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 24 (Ryzen 3 3100) — the Ryzen 3 3100 offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and AMD 500 series,AMD 400 series,AMD 300 series (Ryzen 3 3100).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 3 3100
Socket	LGA1200	AM4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 4.0+33%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	DDR4-3200
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	128 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	24+50%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Ryzen 3 3100 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) vs AMD-V (Ryzen 3 3100). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, Ryzen 3 3100 targets Desktop. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 3 3100
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	No	Yes
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	AMD-V
Target Use	Gaming	Desktop

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Ryzen 3 3100 debuted at $99. On MSRP ($160 vs $99), the Ryzen 3 3100 is $61 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 120.5 pts/$ for the Ryzen 3 3100 — making the Ryzen 3 3100 the 38.7% better value option.