CPU Comparison
Intel Core 7 160UL
Core i5-10400F
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: Intel Core 7 160UL vs Intel Core i5-10400F
The Intel Core 7 160UL and Intel Core i5-10400F are closely matched in overall average benchmark scores, with the Core 7 160UL at 14232 and the i5-10400F at 14185, a difference of only 0.3%. Despite this near-parity in aggregate performance, their individual test results reveal distinct personalities: the Core 7 160UL wins on 6 benchmarks, while the i5-10400F claims 11. The data shows that the choice between them hinges on workload type, with the newer Raptor Lake part excelling in specific computational tasks and the older Comet Lake part maintaining a broad lead in general-purpose and rendering workloads.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The most decisive victory for the Intel Core 7 160UL comes in PassMark data encryption, where it scores 7146 against the i5-10400F’s 4100. That is a 74.3% advantage, the largest delta in the entire comparison. This suggests the Core 7 160UL’s architecture handles cryptographic instructions with significantly greater efficiency. A second major win is in PassMark single-thread performance: the Core 7 160UL scores 3391 versus 2541, a 33.5% lead. This single-core strength carries over to PassMark integer math (47515 vs 41471, a 14.6% win) and PassMark physics (819 vs 696, a 17.7% win). The Core 7 160UL also edges out the i5-10400F in PassMark find prime numbers, scoring 50 against 35, a 42.9% margin.
The Intel Core i5-10400F, however, dominates in several other categories. Its largest win is in PassMark data compression, where it scores 185944 versus the Core 7 160UL’s 108953, a 41.4% deficit for the newer chip. Similarly, in PassMark random string sorting, the i5-10400F scores 23185 against 11843, a 48.9% gap. The i5-10400F also leads heavily in PassMark extended instructions (12500 vs 5832, a 53.3% advantage). In rendering workloads, the i5-10400F is consistently ahead: Cinebench R23 multicore shows 10283 vs 9386, an 8.7% lead, and the same 8.7% delta appears across all Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 tests, both single-core and multi-core. The i5-10400F’s PassMark multithread score of 12115 also beats the Core 7 160UL’s 11043 by 8.8%.
The narrowest margins reveal where the two are nearly interchangeable. In PassMark floating point math, the i5-10400F scores 25956 versus 25670, a mere 1.1% difference. Both chips also sit within 0.6% of each other in average score when compared to their nearest rivals, confirming they occupy the same performance tier overall.
The Verdict
The data indicates that the Intel Core i5-10400F is the stronger choice for users prioritizing multi-threaded rendering and data-heavy tasks. Its consistent 8.7% lead across every Cinebench iteration, from R15 to R23, single-core and multi-core, demonstrates a clear advantage in 3D modeling, video encoding, and other CPU-bound creative workloads. The i5-10400F also shows overwhelming superiority in data compression (41.4% faster) and random string sorting (48.9% faster), making it the better option for database management, file archiving, or any workload that involves sorting or compressing large datasets. Its PassMark extended instructions lead (53.3%) further suggests better support for legacy or specialized instruction sets.
The Intel Core 7 160UL, conversely, is the data’s pick for security-related tasks and single-thread responsiveness. The 74.3% encryption advantage indicates the Core 7 160UL is markedly better suited for VPNs, disk encryption, or secure web traffic. Its 33.5% single-thread lead in PassMark, combined with wins in integer math (14.6%) and physics (17.7%), points to snappier day-to-day application performance in lightly threaded software. The 42.9% lead in prime number finding also hints at stronger algorithmic processing capabilities. Users who run encryption-heavy workloads or rely on applications that are poorly optimized for multiple cores would see the most benefit from the Core 7 160UL.
Architecture Differences
The two processors come from different Intel generations and manufacturing processes. The Core 7 160UL is built on Raptor Lake architecture using a 10 nm process node, while the i5-10400F uses Comet Lake architecture on a 14 nm node. The Core 7 160UL features 10 cores and 12 threads, compared to the i5-10400F’s 6 cores and 12 threads. The Core 7 160UL’s base clock is 1.80 GHz with a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, whereas the i5-10400F runs at a higher 2.90 GHz base but a lower 4.30 GHz boost. The Core 7 160UL has a 15 W TDP versus the i5-10400F’s 65 W TDP, indicating the former is far more power-efficient.
Cache layouts differ significantly. The Core 7 160UL provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, while the i5-10400F offers 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core. Both share 12 MB of L3 cache. The Core 7 160UL supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, whereas the i5-10400F is limited to DDR4. The i5-10400F does list a memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, a figure absent for the Core 7 160UL. PCIe support also diverges: the Core 7 160UL uses Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes, while the i5-10400F uses Gen 3 with 16 lanes. The Core 7 160UL includes integrated Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units; the i5-10400F has no integrated graphics.
FAQ
Q: Which CPU is faster in Cinebench R23 multicore?
A: The Intel Core i5-10400F scores 10283 versus the Intel Core 7 160UL’s 9386, an 8.7% advantage for the i5-10400F.
Q: How much better is the Core 7 160UL at encryption?
A: In PassMark data encryption, the Core 7 160UL scores 7146 compared to the i5-10400F’s 4100, which is a 74.3% higher score.
Q: Do both CPUs have the same number of cores?
A: No. The Core 7 160UL has 10 cores, while the i5-10400F has 6 cores. Both have 12 threads.
Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?
A: The Core 7 160UL has a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, which is higher than the i5-10400F’s 4.30 GHz boost clock.
Q: Is the Core 7 160UL more power-efficient?
A: Yes, the Core 7 160UL has a 15 W TDP, while the i5-10400F has a 65 W TDP.
Q: Does the i5-10400F support DDR5 memory?
A: No. The i5-10400F supports only DDR4, whereas the Core 7 160UL supports both DDR4 and DDR5.
Where Each One Wins
The Intel Core 7 160UL wins in six benchmark categories. Its most pronounced victory is data encryption (74.3% ahead), followed by single-thread performance (33.5% ahead), prime number finding (42.9% ahead), physics (17.7% ahead), and integer math (14.6% ahead). These wins point to workloads involving cryptography, single-threaded applications, and physics simulations. The Core 7 160UL’s high boost clock of 5.20 GHz likely contributes to its single-thread dominance.
The Intel Core i5-10400F wins in eleven categories, including all Cinebench tests. Its largest margins come from random string sorting (48.9% ahead), data compression (41.4% ahead), and extended instructions (53.3% ahead). The i5-10400F also holds smaller but consistent leads in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core, with 8.7% to 8.9% deltas. Its PassMark multithread score is 8.8% higher. These results favor rendering, compression, sorting, and general multi-threaded productivity tasks.
Specification Differences
The two CPUs differ in several key specifications. The Core 7 160UL has 10 cores and 12 threads, while the i5-10400F has 6 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks are 1.80 GHz for the Core 7 160UL and 2.90 GHz for the i5-10400F, but boost clocks reverse the order: 5.20 GHz versus 4.30 GHz. TDP differs substantially, with the Core 7 160UL at 15 W and the i5-10400F at 65 W. Sockets are incompatible: the Core 7 160UL uses Intel Socket 1700, while the i5-10400F uses Intel Socket 1200.
Process node and architecture also separate them: the Core 7 160UL is 10 nm Raptor Lake, and the i5-10400F is 14 nm Comet Lake. Cache configurations differ per core: L1 is 80 KB per core on the Core 7 160UL versus 64 KB on the i5-10400F, and L2 is 1.25 MB per core versus 256 KB. Both share 12 MB L3. Memory support is broader on the Core 7 160UL (DDR4 and DDR5) versus DDR4-only on the i5-10400F. The i5-10400F lists a memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s; the Core 7 160UL does not. PCIe generations differ: Gen 4 with 8 lanes on the Core 7 160UL versus Gen 3 with 16 lanes on the i5-10400F. The Core 7 160UL includes Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units, while the i5-10400F has none.