
Core i5-10400F
Popular choices:

Ryzen Threadripper 9980X
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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
2020Why buy it
- ✅Costs $4,839 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $4,999 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 186.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 28.4 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $4,999 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 350W, a 285W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen Threadripper 9980X.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper 9980X across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,191 vs 115,098).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Ryzen Threadripper 9980X, which brings 64 cores / 128 threads and 80 PCIe lanes.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Ryzen Threadripper 9980X moves to sTR5 and DDR5.
Ryzen Threadripper 9980X
2025Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +92.7% higher average FPS across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 64 cores / 128 threads, plus 80 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅Newer platform on sTR5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
- ✅400% more PCIe lanes (80 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 28.4 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($4,999 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ❌438.5% higher power demand at 350W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Core i5-10400F
2020Ryzen Threadripper 9980X
2025Why buy it
- ✅Costs $4,839 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $4,999 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 186.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 28.4 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $4,999 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 350W, a 285W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen Threadripper 9980X.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +92.7% higher average FPS across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 64 cores / 128 threads, plus 80 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅Newer platform on sTR5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
- ✅400% more PCIe lanes (80 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper 9980X across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,191 vs 115,098).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Ryzen Threadripper 9980X, which brings 64 cores / 128 threads and 80 PCIe lanes.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Ryzen Threadripper 9980X moves to sTR5 and DDR5.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 28.4 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($4,999 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ❌438.5% higher power demand at 350W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen Threadripper 9980X better than Core i5-10400F?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Games Benchmarks
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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen Threadripper 9980X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 192 FPS | 303 FPS |
| medium | 152 FPS | 281 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 231 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 195 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 268 FPS |
| medium | 119 FPS | 224 FPS |
| high | 97 FPS | 172 FPS |
| ultra | 79 FPS | 152 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 186 FPS |
| medium | 70 FPS | 155 FPS |
| high | 55 FPS | 117 FPS |
| ultra | 43 FPS | 105 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen Threadripper 9980X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 803 FPS |
| medium | 318 FPS | 687 FPS |
| high | 290 FPS | 538 FPS |
| ultra | 253 FPS | 468 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 662 FPS |
| medium | 292 FPS | 590 FPS |
| high | 267 FPS | 477 FPS |
| ultra | 234 FPS | 386 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 309 FPS | 370 FPS |
| medium | 258 FPS | 334 FPS |
| high | 235 FPS | 308 FPS |
| ultra | 199 FPS | 269 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen Threadripper 9980X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 889 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 728 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 654 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 556 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 693 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 567 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 498 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 419 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 490 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 407 FPS |
| high | 289 FPS | 365 FPS |
| ultra | 229 FPS | 303 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen Threadripper 9980X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 1131 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 1014 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 889 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 802 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 890 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 783 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 688 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 599 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 649 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 579 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 514 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 437 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Ryzen Threadripper 9980X

Core i5-10400F
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 Threadripper 9980X
Ryzen Threadripper 9980X
The Ryzen Threadripper 9980X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 30 July 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Shimada Peak (2025) architecture. It features 64 cores and 128 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 5.4 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: sTR5. Thermal design power (TDP): 350 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 142,069 points. Launch price was $4,999.
Processing Power
The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Ryzen Threadripper 9980X offers 64 cores / 128 threads — the Ryzen Threadripper 9980X has 58 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5.4 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper 9980X — a 22.7% clock advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper 9980X (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.2 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Ryzen Threadripper 9980X uses Shimada Peak (2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Ryzen Threadripper 9980X's 142,069 — a 166.4% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper 9980X. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 8,191 vs 115,098 (173.4% advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper 9980X). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 3,220, a 75.6% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper 9980X that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 5,783 vs 28,666 (132.9% advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper 9980X). L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 256 MB (total) on the Ryzen Threadripper 9980X.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen Threadripper 9980X |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 64 / 128+967% |
| Boost Clock | 4.3 GHz | 5.4 GHz+26% |
| Base Clock | 2.9 GHz | 3.2 GHz+10% |
| L3 Cache | 12 MB (total) | 256 MB (total)+2033% |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 1 MB (per core)+300% |
| Process | 14 nm | 4 nm-71% |
| Architecture | Comet Lake (2020−2025) | Shimada Peak (2025) |
| PassMark | 13,029 | 142,069+990% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 8,191 | 115,098+1305% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,454 | 3,220+121% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 5,783 | 28,666+396% |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Ryzen Threadripper 9980X uses sTR5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus DDR5-6400 on the Ryzen Threadripper 9980X — the Ryzen Threadripper 9980X supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i5-10400F supports up to 128 GB of RAM compared to 1 TB — 196.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-10400F) vs 4 (Ryzen Threadripper 9980X). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 80 (Ryzen Threadripper 9980X) — the Ryzen Threadripper 9980X offers 64 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and sTR5,TRX50 (Ryzen Threadripper 9980X).
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen Threadripper 9980X |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1200 | sTR5 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 4.0+33% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666 | DDR5-6400+25% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB | 1 TB+700% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 4+100% |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 80+400% |
Advanced Features
Only the Ryzen Threadripper 9980X has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Ryzen Threadripper 9980X supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) vs AMD-V, SVM (Ryzen Threadripper 9980X). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, Ryzen Threadripper 9980X targets HEDT / Enthusiast Workstation. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; Ryzen Threadripper 9980X rivals Xeon w9-3495X.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen Threadripper 9980X |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | No | Yes |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | AMD-V, SVM |
| Target Use | Gaming | HEDT / Enthusiast Workstation |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Ryzen Threadripper 9980X debuted at $4999. On MSRP ($160 vs $4999), the Core i5-10400F is $4839 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 28.4 pts/$ for the Ryzen Threadripper 9980X — making the Core i5-10400F the 96.5% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Ryzen Threadripper 9980X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $160-97% | $4999 |
| Performance per Dollar | 81.4+187% | 28.4 |
| Release Date | 2020 | 2025 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.











