
Core i5-10400F
Popular choices:

Xeon 6780E
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 $11,190 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $11,350 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 965.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 7.6 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $11,350 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 330W, a 265W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon 6780E.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon 6780E across 7 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 86,734).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon 6780E, which brings 144 cores / 144 threads and 88 PCIe lanes.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Xeon 6780E moves to LGA4710 and DDR5.
Xeon 6780E
2024Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +47.4% higher average FPS across 7 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 144 cores / 144 threads, plus 88 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA4710 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
- ✅450% more PCIe lanes (88 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 7.6 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($11,350 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ❌407.7% higher power demand at 330W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Core i5-10400F
2020Xeon 6780E
2024Why buy it
- ✅Costs $11,190 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $11,350 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 965.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 7.6 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $11,350 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 330W, a 265W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon 6780E.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +47.4% higher average FPS across 7 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 144 cores / 144 threads, plus 88 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA4710 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
- ✅450% more PCIe lanes (88 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon 6780E across 7 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 86,734).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon 6780E, which brings 144 cores / 144 threads and 88 PCIe lanes.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Xeon 6780E moves to LGA4710 and DDR5.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 7.6 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($11,350 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ❌407.7% higher power demand at 330W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Xeon 6780E 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 | Xeon 6780E |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 192 FPS | 189 FPS |
| medium | 152 FPS | 152 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 121 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 95 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 153 FPS |
| medium | 119 FPS | 119 FPS |
| high | 97 FPS | 91 FPS |
| ultra | 79 FPS | 73 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 71 FPS |
| medium | 70 FPS | 59 FPS |
| high | 55 FPS | 46 FPS |
| ultra | 43 FPS | 38 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Xeon 6780E |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 244 FPS |
| medium | 318 FPS | 216 FPS |
| high | 290 FPS | 178 FPS |
| ultra | 253 FPS | 142 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 200 FPS |
| medium | 292 FPS | 181 FPS |
| high | 267 FPS | 154 FPS |
| ultra | 234 FPS | 120 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 309 FPS | 124 FPS |
| medium | 258 FPS | 115 FPS |
| high | 235 FPS | 100 FPS |
| ultra | 199 FPS | 81 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Xeon 6780E |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 934 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 831 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 779 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 693 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 746 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 655 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 614 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 546 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 479 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 378 FPS |
| high | 289 FPS | 334 FPS |
| ultra | 229 FPS | 272 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Xeon 6780E |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 897 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 807 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 691 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 588 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 697 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 606 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 517 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 436 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 500 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 446 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 390 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 334 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Xeon 6780E

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.

Xeon 6780E
Xeon 6780E
The Xeon 6780E is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 June 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Sierra Forest (2024) architecture. It features 144 cores and 144 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 108 MB (total). L2 cache: 4 MB (per module). Built on Intel 3 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4710. Thermal design power (TDP): 330 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 86,734 points. Launch price was $11,350.
Processing Power
The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Xeon 6780E offers 144 cores / 144 threads — the Xeon 6780E has 138 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 3 GHz on the Xeon 6780E — a 35.6% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.9 GHz vs 2.2 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon 6780E uses Sierra Forest (2024) (Intel 3 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Xeon 6780E's 86,734 — a 147.8% lead for the Xeon 6780E. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 108 MB (total) on the Xeon 6780E.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Xeon 6780E |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 144 / 144+2300% |
| Boost Clock | 4.3 GHz+43% | 3 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.9 GHz+32% | 2.2 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 12 MB (total) | 108 MB (total)+800% |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 4 MB (per module)+1500% |
| Process | 14 nm | Intel 3 nm-79% |
| Architecture | Comet Lake (2020−2025) | Sierra Forest (2024) |
| PassMark | 13,029 | 86,734+566% |
| 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 Xeon 6780E uses LGA4710 (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 Xeon 6780E — the Xeon 6780E 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 4 TB — 187.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-10400F) vs 8 (Xeon 6780E). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 88 (Xeon 6780E) — the Xeon 6780E offers 72 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Xeon 6780E |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1200 | LGA4710 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 4.0+33% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666 | DDR5-6400+25% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB | 4 TB+3100% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 8+300% |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 88+450% |
Advanced Features
Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) vs VT-x, VT-d, VT-x EPT (Xeon 6780E). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, Xeon 6780E targets Cloud Native Compute. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; Xeon 6780E rivals EPYC 9754.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Xeon 6780E |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d, VT-x EPT |
| Target Use | Gaming | Cloud Native Compute |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Xeon 6780E debuted at $11350. On MSRP ($160 vs $11350), the Core i5-10400F is $11190 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 7.6 pts/$ for the Xeon 6780E — making the Core i5-10400F the 165.7% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Xeon 6780E |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $160-99% | $11350 |
| Performance per Dollar | 81.4+971% | 7.6 |
| Release Date | 2020 | 2024 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












