Intel Core i5-10400 vs Intel Core i7-9750H Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits these two six-core, twelve-thread processors into two distinct personalities. The Intel Core i7-9750H, a mobile part, claims victory in every Cinebench iteration and both Geekbench tests. Its wins are consistent and often substantial, particularly in single-core Geekbench where it leads by 21.8%. The i7-9750H also edges out the i5-10400 in PassMark physics by a razor-thin 0.1%, a near tie that nonetheless goes to the mobile chip.

The Intel Core i5-10400, a desktop processor, dominates the PassMark suite. It wins data compression by 19.6%, extended instructions by 26.5%, and random string sorting by 14.4%. It also takes floating point math, integer math, multithread, encryption, prime numbers, and single-thread tests. The desktop chip wins 9 of the 18 head-to-head comparisons, while the mobile chip wins the other 9, but the margins tell the real story: the i5-10400's victories are frequently large, while the i7-9750H's Cinebench wins hover around 7.6% to 7.9% and its Geekbench multicore win is 11.1%.

The use case split is clear. Rendering workloads, as captured by Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, favor the mobile i7-9750H. General system responsiveness, as measured by Geekbench, also favors the i7. But compute-heavy tasks like encryption, compression, sorting, and math operations favor the desktop i5-10400, often by double-digit margins. The data suggests the desktop chip extracts more sustained throughput from identical core and thread counts in integer-heavy and specialized instruction workloads.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share fundamental design elements. Each has 6 cores and 12 threads, uses a 14 nm process node from Intel, supports DDR4 memory through a dual-channel bus with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth, and carries 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core. Both have 12 MB of shared L3 cache and integrate UHD 630-class graphics, with the i5-10400 listing UHD Graphics 630 and the i7-9750H listing UHD 630. Neither supports ECC memory, and both have locked multipliers.

The differences begin with architecture generation. The i7-9750H is built on Coffee Lake, specifically the Coffee Lake-HR variant, and belongs to the Core i7 (Coffee Lake-HR) generation. The i5-10400 uses Comet Lake and belongs to the Core i5 (Comet Lake) generation. The mobile chip has a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz, while the desktop chip starts higher at 2.90 GHz base but boosts lower at 4.30 GHz.

Socket and market segment diverge sharply. The i7-9750H uses Intel BGA 1440 and is a mobile part, while the i5-10400 uses Intel Socket 1200 and is a desktop part. The thermal design power reflects this: 45 W for the mobile chip versus 65 W for the desktop chip. The i5-10400 also lists PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the i7-9750H lists only PCIe Gen 3 without lane specification in the database. The mobile chip has a die size of 149 mm², whereas the desktop chip's die size is not recorded. Production status also differs: the i7-9750H is end-of-life, while the i5-10400 remains active. Release dates are about a year apart, with the mobile part launching in April 2019 and the desktop part in April 2020.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results form a consistent block of i7-9750H victories. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the mobile chip scores 904 against 838, a 7.9% lead. The single-core R15 result is 127 versus 118, a 7.6% gap. Cinebench R20 multicore shows 3768 against 3492, again 7.9%, and single-core shows 531 versus 493, a 7.7% margin. Cinebench R23 multicore continues the pattern at 8973 versus 8316, a 7.9% lead, with single-core at 1266 versus 1174, a 7.8% gap. The consistency across three Cinebench versions suggests a stable architectural advantage in this workload, not a version-specific anomaly.

Geekbench amplifies the i7-9750H's lead. Multicore scores are 5323 versus 4790, an 11.1% advantage. Single-core is the biggest win for the mobile chip: 1349 versus 1108, a 21.8% margin. This single-core result is notable because the i5-10400 actually wins PassMark single-thread by 6.1%, scoring 2560 against 2404. The two benchmarks disagree on single-core performance, with Geekbench favoring the mobile chip far more strongly.

The PassMark suite flips the narrative. Data compression sees the i5-10400 score 187207 against 150443, a 19.6% lead. Extended instructions show 12501 versus 9187, a massive 26.5% gap, the largest of any comparison. Random string sorting goes to the desktop chip at 23206 versus 19862, a 14.4% difference. Floating point math favors the i5-10400 at 26080 versus 23343, a 10.5% margin, and integer math follows at 41715 versus 37822, a 9.3% gap. Multithread scores are 12006 versus 10671, an 11.1% lead for the desktop chip. Data encryption is closer at 4078 versus 3756, a 7.9% margin, and find prime numbers is nearly tied at 34 versus 32, a 5.9% difference. The only PassMark test the i7-9750H wins is physics, at 670 versus 669, a 0.1% margin that is effectively a statistical tie.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a split decision based on workload. For rendering, video encoding, and general productivity as measured by Cinebench and Geekbench, the Intel Core i7-9750H is the stronger choice. Its 7.9% multicore Cinebench advantage and 11.1% Geekbench multicore lead are consistent and repeatable across multiple benchmark versions. The 21.8% Geekbench single-core win is particularly striking, though it is contradicted by the PassMark single-thread result where the i5-10400 leads by 6.1%.

For compute-heavy desktop workloads, the Intel Core i5-10400 is clearly superior. Its 26.5% lead in extended instructions, 19.6% lead in data compression, and 14.4% lead in random string sorting indicate that specialized instruction execution and memory-access patterns benefit from the desktop platform. The 11.1% multithread advantage in PassMark, despite losing Cinebench multicore by 7.9%, suggests the desktop chip sustains throughput better under certain load types.

The mobile chip offers a higher boost clock and lower TDP, which suits thermally constrained laptops. The desktop chip offers a higher base clock and active production status. Users who prioritize rendering and everyday responsiveness should favor the i7-9750H. Users who run compression, encryption, sorting, or math-heavy tasks should favor the i5-10400. The data does not support a single universal winner.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better multicore performance?

A: It depends on the benchmark. The Intel Core i7-9750H wins Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multicore by 7.9% each, and Geekbench multicore by 11.1%. The Intel Core i5-10400 wins PassMark multithread by 11.1%.

Q: How do the two compare in single-core performance?

A: The i7-9750H wins Geekbench single-core by 21.8% and all three Cinebench single-core tests by 7.6% to 7.8%. The i5-10400 wins PassMark single-thread by 6.1%.

Q: Are the core and thread counts the same?

A: Yes, both have 6 cores and 12 threads with 12 MB of shared L3 cache and 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 cache per core.

Q: Which chip has the higher clock speeds?

A: The i7-9750H has a lower base clock at 2.60 GHz but a higher boost clock at 4.50 GHz. The i5-10400 has a higher base clock at 2.90 GHz but a lower boost clock at 4.30 GHz.

Q: Which processor is better for compression and encryption workloads?

A: The i5-10400. It wins PassMark data compression by 19.6% and data encryption by 7.9%.

Q: What are the market segments for these two CPUs?

A: The i7-9750H is a mobile processor with a 45 W TDP using Intel BGA 1440. The i5-10400 is a desktop processor with a 65 W TDP using Intel Socket 1200.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-9750H | Intel Core i5-10400 |

|---|---|---|

| Base clock | 2.60 GHz | 2.90 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.50 GHz | 4.30 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 65 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1440 | Intel Socket 1200 |

| Architecture | Coffee Lake | Comet Lake |

| Codename | Coffee Lake-HR | Comet Lake |

| Generation | Core i7 (Coffee Lake-HR) | Core i5 (Comet Lake) |

| Die size | 149 mm² | Not recorded |

| PCIe | Gen 3 | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | UHD 630 | UHD Graphics 630 |

| Market segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Production status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release date | 2019-04-22 | 2020-04-29 |

| Part number | SRF6USRFCP | SRH3CSRH78 |

| Average benchmark score | 14886 | 14037 |

| Percentile vs all CPUs | 69 | 68 |