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 $240 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $400 MSRP).
✅Delivers 49.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 54.5 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $400 MSRP).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen 7 PRO 250.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 PRO 250 across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 21,789).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 16 MB).
❌712.5% higher power demand at 65W vs 8W.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Ryzen 7 PRO 250 moves to FP8 and DDR5.

Ryzen 7 PRO 250

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +50.9% higher average FPS across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Draws 8W instead of 65W, a 57W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FP8 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 54.5 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($400 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Ryzen 7 PRO 250

2025

Why buy it

✅Costs $240 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $400 MSRP).
✅Delivers 49.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 54.5 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $400 MSRP).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen 7 PRO 250.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +50.9% higher average FPS across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Draws 8W instead of 65W, a 57W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FP8 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 PRO 250 across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 21,789).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 16 MB).
❌712.5% higher power demand at 65W vs 8W.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Ryzen 7 PRO 250 moves to FP8 and DDR5.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 54.5 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($400 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen 7 PRO 250 better than Core i5-10400F?

Yes. Ryzen 7 PRO 250 is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 50.9% average FPS lead across 6 shared CPU game tests in our data, 67.2% 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, Ryzen 7 PRO 250 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 50.9% more average FPS across 6 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Ryzen 7 PRO 250 is the better fit. You are getting 67.2% 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?

Ryzen 7 PRO 250 is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-10400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Ryzen 7 PRO 250 is 150.0% more expensive on MSRP at $400 MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you a 50.9% average FPS lead across 6 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-10400F is also 49.5% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 54.5 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

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

Ryzen 7 PRO 250 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2020), a healthier platform with FP8 and DDR5 instead of LGA1200, 33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 8 cores / 16 threads instead of 6/12. 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 i5-10400F Benchmark Check

Ryzen 7 PRO 250 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 PRO 250
1080p
low	192 FPS	259 FPS
medium	152 FPS	238 FPS
high	123 FPS	201 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	173 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	229 FPS
medium	119 FPS	191 FPS
high	97 FPS	155 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	137 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	159 FPS
medium	70 FPS	134 FPS
high	55 FPS	104 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	92 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 7 PRO 250

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 PRO 250
1080p
low	326 FPS	492 FPS
medium	318 FPS	408 FPS
high	290 FPS	356 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	319 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	430 FPS
medium	292 FPS	376 FPS
high	267 FPS	328 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	281 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	284 FPS
medium	258 FPS	259 FPS
high	235 FPS	248 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	214 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 7 PRO 250

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 PRO 250
1080p
low	326 FPS	545 FPS
medium	326 FPS	545 FPS
high	326 FPS	545 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	522 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	545 FPS
medium	326 FPS	545 FPS
high	326 FPS	523 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	449 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	523 FPS
medium	326 FPS	457 FPS
high	289 FPS	405 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	343 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 7 PRO 250

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 PRO 250
1080p
low	326 FPS	545 FPS
medium	326 FPS	545 FPS
high	326 FPS	545 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	545 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	545 FPS
medium	326 FPS	545 FPS
high	326 FPS	545 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	545 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	545 FPS
medium	326 FPS	502 FPS
high	326 FPS	449 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	385 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen 7 PRO 250

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Ryzen 7 PRO 250

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 7 PRO 250

The Ryzen 7 PRO 250 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 6 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Hawk Point-U (Zen 4) (2023−2025) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.3 GHz, with boost up to 5.1 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB. L2 cache: 8 MB. Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: FP8. Thermal design power (TDP): 8 MB + 16 MB. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 21,789 points. Launch price was $299.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Ryzen 7 PRO 250 offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Ryzen 7 PRO 250 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5.1 GHz on the Ryzen 7 PRO 250 — a 17% clock advantage for the Ryzen 7 PRO 250 (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.3 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Ryzen 7 PRO 250 uses Hawk Point-U (Zen 4) (2023−2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Ryzen 7 PRO 250's 21,789 — a 50.3% lead for the Ryzen 7 PRO 250. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 16 MB on the Ryzen 7 PRO 250.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 PRO 250
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	8 / 16+33%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz	5.1 GHz+19%
Base Clock	2.9 GHz	3.3 GHz+14%
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	16 MB+33%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	8 MB+3100%
Process	14 nm	4 nm-71%
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Hawk Point-U (Zen 4) (2023−2025)
PassMark	13,029	21,789+67%
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 7 PRO 250 uses FP8 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 PRO 250
Socket	LGA1200	FP8
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 4.0+33%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	—
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) / not specified (Ryzen 7 PRO 250). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen 7 PRO 250
Integrated GPU	No	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	—
Target Use	Gaming	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Ryzen 7 PRO 250 debuted at $400. On MSRP ($160 vs $400), the Core i5-10400F is $240 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 54.5 pts/$ for the Ryzen 7 PRO 250 — making the Core i5-10400F the 39.7% better value option.