Intel Core i5-10400 vs Intel Core i7-8750H Comparison

The Intel Core i5-10400 and Intel Core i7-8750H are both 6-core, 12-thread Intel processors, but they serve very different platforms: one is a desktop part for Socket 1200, the other is a mobile part for BGA 1440. The benchmark data shows a clear overall winner, but the story is not one-sided, with the mobile chip taking two notable victories in Geekbench tests.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive wins for the Intel Core i5-10400 come in the Passmark suite, where it dominates across the board. The largest margin is in passmark_extended_instructions, where the i5-10400 scores 12,501 against the i7-8750H's 8,637, a 44.7% advantage. This suggests a significant difference in handling specialized instruction sets. Data compression shows another major gap: the i5-10400's 187,207 score is 34.3% higher than the i7-8750H's 139,418. This is a substantial lead for tasks involving archiving or database workloads. The i5-10400 also wins passmark_find_prime_numbers by 25.9% (34 vs 27) and passmark_random_string_sorting by 24.6% (23,206 vs 18,622), indicating a strong lead in integer-heavy, memory-bound operations.

In multi-threaded performance, the i5-10400 maintains a consistent, if smaller, edge. The passmark_multithread score shows a 22.5% lead (12,006 vs 9,799). This pattern repeats in the Cinebench tests, though with much narrower margins. In cinebench_r23_multicore, the i5-10400 scores 8,316 versus 8,274, a 0.5% win. Similarly, cinebench_r20_multicore shows 3,492 vs 3,475 (0.5% lead), and cinebench_r15_multicore shows 838 vs 834 (0.5% lead). These Cinebench results suggest that in a pure render workload, the two CPUs are nearly identical, with the desktop part holding only a hair-thin advantage.

The i5-10400 also wins all the single-threaded Passmark tests, with passmark_single_thread at 2,560 vs 2,276, a 12.5% advantage. However, the picture gets interesting in Geekbench. The i7-8750H wins geekbench_singlecore with a score of 1,309 versus the i5-10400's 1,108, a 15.4% margin. It also wins geekbench_multicore with 4,978 vs 4,790, a 3.8% lead. This is a notable reversal. While the i5-10400 dominates in Passmark and narrowly edges out the i7-8750H in Cinebench, the older mobile chip takes a clear victory in Geekbench, suggesting its performance is tuned differently for that benchmark's specific workload.

Other wins for the i5-10400 include passmark_floating_point_math (26,080 vs 22,179, a 17.6% lead), passmark_integer_math (41,715 vs 35,629, a 17.1% lead), passmark_data_encryption (4,078 vs 3,388, a 20.4% lead), and passmark_physics (669 vs 604, a 10.8% lead). In total, the i5-10400 wins 17 out of 19 head-to-head benchmarks, with the i7-8750H taking only the two Geekbench tests.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in multi-core rendering?

A: The Intel Core i5-10400 wins all three Cinebench multi-core tests, but by a tiny margin. In cinebench_r23_multicore, it scores 8,316 vs 8,274, a 0.5% lead. The results are similar in cinebench_r20_multicore (3,492 vs 3,475) and cinebench_r15_multicore (838 vs 834). In practice, these are effectively tied for render workloads.

Q: The Geekbench results show the i7-8750H winning. What does that mean?

A: The data indicates the i7-8750H is significantly ahead in Geekbench. It wins geekbench_singlecore by 15.4% (1,309 vs 1,108) and geekbench_multicore by 3.8% (4,978 vs 4,790). This is the one benchmark suite where the mobile chip demonstrates a clear advantage, which could indicate better performance in certain types of short, bursty workloads.

Q: How do their overall average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Core i5-10400 has an average benchmark score of 14,037, which places it 0.7% ahead of the AMD EPYC 7443 and 0.6% behind the AMD EPYC 7552. The Intel Core i7-8750H has an average score of 13,868, which is 0.5% behind the EPYC 7443 and 1.2% behind the i5-10400. Both CPUs sit in the 68th percentile of all CPUs.

Q: Which CPU is better for data compression tasks?

A: The Intel Core i5-10400 is much better. In the passmark_data_compression test, it scores 187,207 against the i7-8750H's 139,418, a 34.3% lead. This is a large, practical advantage for workloads involving file archiving or database compression.

Q: How does the i5-10400 compare to its direct rival, the i5-10400F?

A: The data shows the Intel Core i5-10400 has an average benchmark score of 14,037, which is 1% behind the Intel Core i5-10400F's score of 14,185. This is a negligible difference in overall performance.

Q: What about the i7-8750H's standing among its rivals?

A: The i7-8750H's average score of 13,868 is 0.6% higher than the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX and 0.9% higher than the Intel Core 3 304. It is also 1.2% lower than the i5-10400, which is listed as its closest rival.

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Core i5-10400 as the superior processor. It wins 17 of 19 head-to-head benchmarks, with its most significant victories in the Passmark suite, where leads of 44.7% in extended instructions and 34.3% in data compression are too large to ignore. The i5-10400 also has a higher average benchmark score (14,037 vs 13,868). The i7-8750H's only wins are in Geekbench, where it leads by 15.4% in single-core and 3.8% in multi-core. However, the i5-10400 still wins in single-threaded Passmark tests (2,560 vs 2,276, a 12.5% lead) and all Cinebench tests, even if by less than 1%. For most workloads, the i5-10400 is the stronger choice. The i7-8750H's Geekbench wins are noteworthy, but they do not outweigh the broad and often large advantages of the i5-10400 in other benchmarks. The i5-10400 is the faster chip overall.

Specification Differences

The two processors have identical core and thread counts, each with 6 cores and 12 threads. They also share the same L1 cache (64 KB per core), L2 cache (256 KB per core), and L3 cache (12 MB shared). Both are built on a 14 nm process node by Intel and support DDR4 memory. The key differences begin with clock speeds: the i5-10400 has a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, while the i7-8750H has a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. The i5-10400 also has a higher TDP of 65 watts compared to the i7-8750H's 45 watts. The i5-10400 uses an Intel Socket 1200 and is a desktop part, while the i7-8750H uses Intel BGA 1440 and is a mobile part. The i5-10400 has a memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s with a dual-channel memory bus, while the i7-8750H's memory bus and bandwidth are not listed in the data. The i5-10400 supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the i7-8750H's PCIe support is not listed. The i5-10400 is marked as "Active" production status, while the i7-8750H is "End-of-life." Their integrated graphics are nearly identical, with the i5-10400 featuring UHD Graphics 630 and the i7-8750H featuring UHD 630. The i5-10400 was released on 2020-04-29, while the i7-8750H was released on 2018-04-01.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split comes down to two different Intel generations. The Intel Core i5-10400 is based on the Comet Lake architecture and is part of the Core 10th Gen series. The Intel Core i7-8750H uses the Coffee Lake architecture, specifically the Coffee Lake-H codename, and belongs to the Core i7 (Coffee Lake-H) generation. Both are manufactured on Intel's 14 nm process node, but the i7-8750H has a listed die size of 149 mm², while the i5-10400's die size is not provided. The i5-10400 is a desktop processor in the Comet Lake lineup, whereas the i7-8750H is a mobile processor designed for laptops. The i5-10400 has a higher boost clock (4.30 GHz vs 4.10 GHz) and a higher base clock (2.90 GHz vs 2.20 GHz), which likely contributes to its performance lead in many tests. The i5-10400 also has a higher 65 W TDP, which is typical for a desktop part with more thermal headroom compared to the 45 W mobile i7-8750H. Neither CPU has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not supported on either. The i5-10400's part number is SRH3CSRH78, while the i7-8750H's is SR3YY.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-10400 is the clear winner for compute-heavy and general productivity tasks. Its 34.3% lead in data compression and 44.7% lead in extended instructions make it the better choice for database work, scientific computing, and any application that leverages specialized CPU instructions. It also wins in floating-point math (17.6% lead), integer math (17.1% lead), and multi-threaded Passmark performance (22.5% lead). For content creation, the Cinebench scores are nearly identical, but the i5-10400 still holds a slight edge across R15, R20, and R23. Its 12.5% lead in single-threaded Passmark and 10.8% lead in physics tests also make it the stronger pick for general desktop responsiveness and gaming physics.

The Intel Core i7-8750H wins exclusively in Geekbench. Its 15.4% lead in single-core and 3.8% lead in multi-core Geekbench scores are significant. This suggests that for specific workloads that are structured similarly to Geekbench's tests—often short, bursty operations that rely on memory latency and specific cache behaviors—the i7-8750H may offer better performance. However, this is a narrow advantage. Outside of Geekbench, the i7-8750H is consistently slower, and in many cases dramatically so. Given that the i5-10400 also holds a 1.2% lead in average benchmark score and wins the majority of tests by double-digit percentages, the i7-8750H's Geekbench wins are not enough to recommend it over the i5-10400 for most users. The i5-10400 is the better all-around processor, with the i7-8750H only being preferable if the specific benchmark pattern of Geekbench is the primary use case.