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

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data presents an unusually one-sided picture. Across all 19 head-to-head tests in the database, the Intel Core i5-10400F claims victory in every single category. The Intel Core i7-9750H does not secure a single win, with winsA registering 0 and winsB registering 19. This is not a case of one chip excelling in multithreaded workloads while the other dominates single-threaded tasks; the i5-10400F simply outperforms the i7-9750H across the board.

The margin of victory varies considerably by workload type. The most lopsided result appears in PassMark extended instructions, where the i5-10400F leads by 26.5%. This suggests a meaningful advantage in workloads that leverage advanced instruction sets, such as AVX or similar extensions. Data compression also shows a substantial gap at 19.1%, indicating that the desktop chip handles compression algorithms with noticeably greater efficiency. Conversely, the narrowest margins appear in PassMark physics (3.7%), Geekbench single-core (5%), and PassMark single-thread (5.4%). These smaller deltas hint that the architectural gap is less pronounced in latency-sensitive, lightly threaded scenarios.

The i7-9750H, despite being positioned as a higher-tier part in Intel's mobile lineup, cannot match the desktop-oriented i5-10400F in any measured discipline. Its role as a mobile processor with a 45 W TDP likely constrains sustained performance, while the i5-10400F operates as a 65 W desktop part. The data implies that for any use case, from single-threaded responsiveness to heavily parallel rendering, the i5-10400F is the stronger choice.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same fundamental building blocks: 6 cores, 12 threads, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. They also both use a 14 nm process node from Intel, and each core carries 64 KB of L1 cache and 256 KB of L2 cache. Memory support is identical on paper, with DDR4, dual-channel configuration, and a memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. Neither chip supports ECC memory, and both have locked multipliers.

The key differences emerge in their architectural generations and physical designs. The i7-9750H belongs to the Coffee Lake generation, specifically the Coffee Lake-HR codename, while the i5-10400F is built on Comet Lake. This generational shift represents Intel's refinement of the same 14 nm process, and the benchmark data suggests that Comet Lake delivers better instruction efficiency per clock. The i5-10400F has a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, compared to the i7-9750H's 2.60 GHz base and 4.50 GHz boost. Interestingly, the i7-9750H has a higher peak boost, yet it still loses in every single-threaded test. This implies that the i5-10400F's architectural improvements more than compensate for its 200 MHz lower boost ceiling.

The packaging and platform differ substantially. The i7-9750H uses Intel BGA 1440, a soldered mobile socket, while the i5-10400F uses Intel Socket 1200, a standard desktop LGA socket. The i7-9750H includes integrated UHD 630 graphics, whereas the i5-10400F has no integrated graphics at all, denoted by the "F" suffix. The i5-10400F also lists PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the i7-9750H simply lists PCIe Gen 3 without lane specification. The i7-9750H has a die size of 149 mm², while the i5-10400F's die size is not recorded in the database.

Production status differs as well: the i7-9750H is end-of-life, released on 2019-04-22, while the i5-10400F remains active, released on 2020-04-29. The i5-10400F is part of the Core 10th Gen series, while the i7-9750H has no series designation. These differences in release timing and platform target help explain the performance gap, as the desktop part benefits from a more power-tolerant environment and a newer architecture iteration.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite paints a consistent picture. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i5-10400F scores 1036 against the i7-9750H's 904, a delta of 12.7%. The single-core R15 test shows 146 versus 127, a 13% gap. Cinebench R20 follows the same pattern: multicore 4318 versus 3768 (12.7%), single-core 609 versus 531 (12.8%). Cinebench R23 continues the trend with multicore 10283 versus 8973 (12.7%) and single-core 1451 versus 1266 (12.7%). The consistency of these deltas across Cinebench versions suggests a uniform clock-for-clock advantage rather than workload-specific variability.

Geekbench results show a slightly different shape. The multicore test gives the i5-10400F a 6257 score against 5323, a 14.9% lead, which is the largest multicore delta among the general-purpose benchmarks. Single-core Geekbench shows a narrower 5% gap, with 1420 versus 1349. This divergence implies that the i5-10400F's advantage grows as more cores are engaged, likely due to better sustained power delivery on the desktop platform.

PassMark tests reveal where the i5-10400F truly stretches its legs. Extended instructions show the biggest delta at 26.5%, with scores of 12500 versus 9187. Data compression follows at 19.1% (185944 versus 150443). Random string sorting shows a 14.3% gap (23185 versus 19862). Floating-point math is 10.1% ahead (25956 versus 23343), integer math 8.8% (41471 versus 37822), and data encryption 8.4% (4100 versus 3756). The multithread test shows 12115 versus 10671, an 11.9% delta, while find prime numbers is close at 8.6% (35 versus 32). The PassMark physics test shows the smallest gap at 3.7% (696 versus 670). Single-thread PassMark shows a 5.4% delta (2541 versus 2404).

The pattern is clear: the i5-10400F wins everywhere, but the margin depends on the workload. Instruction-heavy and compression tasks show the largest gaps, while physics and single-threaded tasks show the smallest. This suggests that the Comet Lake architecture handles complex instruction streams more efficiently, while raw single-thread latency is only modestly improved.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The Intel Core i5-10400F is the superior processor in every recorded benchmark category. With 19 wins out of 19 head-to-head comparisons, there is no scenario in the database where the i7-9750H comes out ahead. The desktop chip leads by margins ranging from 3.7% in PassMark physics to 26.5% in PassMark extended instructions.

For users selecting a processor based on this database, the choice depends on platform and requirements. The i5-10400F targets desktop builds with Socket 1200, requires a discrete GPU due to its lack of integrated graphics, and runs at a 65 W TDP. The i7-9750H targets mobile systems with BGA 1440, includes UHD 630 integrated graphics, and operates at a 45 W TDP. If the application demands a mobile processor with integrated graphics, the i7-9750H is the only option between these two. However, if desktop performance is the goal, the i5-10400F delivers consistently higher scores across all measured workloads, with particularly strong gains in extended instruction processing and data compression.

The i7-9750H's end-of-life status and the i5-10400F's active production status also factor into long-term availability. The i5-10400F also sits at the 68th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the i7-9750H sits at the 69th percentile, despite the i5-10400F having a higher average benchmark score of 14185 versus 14886. This slight percentile inversion is a statistical artifact of the overall CPU distribution, but the head-to-head results remain definitive.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmark tests?

A: The Intel Core i5-10400F wins all 19 head-to-head benchmark tests in the database. The Intel Core i7-9750H does not win a single test.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark extended instructions, where the i5-10400F leads by 26.5% with a score of 12500 against the i7-9750H's 9187.

Q: Are the two processors similar in core count and cache?

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

Q: Do both processors support the same memory?

A: Yes, both support DDR4 memory in dual-channel configuration with a memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. Neither supports ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The i7-9750H includes UHD 630 integrated graphics, while the i5-10400F has no integrated graphics and requires a discrete GPU.

Q: What are the release dates of these processors?

A: The i7-9750H was released on 2019-04-22 and is end-of-life. The i5-10400F was released on 2020-04-29 and remains active.

Specification Differences

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

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

| 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 |

| Series | None | Core 10th Gen |

| Die Size | 149 mm² | Not recorded |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD 630 | None |

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

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

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

| Part Number | SRF6USRFCP | SRH3DSRH79 |