Intel Core i5-8400 vs Intel Core i7-10750H Comparison

The Intel Core i7-10750H and Intel Core i5-8400 are both six-core Intel parts built on the same 14 nm process, but they target entirely different platforms and use cases. Benchmark data shows the i7-10750H wins 18 of 19 head-to-head comparisons, with the only loss coming in PassMark’s extended instructions test. The i7-10750H posts a 23.9% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and a 55.4% advantage in PassMark integer math, yet both CPUs sit at the 68th percentile among all processors. The i5-8400, despite being older and end-of-life, remains competitive in single-threaded and light workloads, making it a viable desktop option where its 65W TDP and Socket 1151 platform fit.

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the Intel Core i7-10750H for any workload that scales with threads. It delivers a 23.8% higher Cinebench R23 multi-core score (9718 vs 7847) and a 25.9% higher PassMark multithread score (11616 vs 9225), driven by its 12 threads versus the i5-8400’s 6 threads. The i7-10750H also leads in single-core performance, with a 10.7% advantage in PassMark single-thread (2625 vs 2371) and a 24.3% lead in Cinebench R15 single-core (138 vs 111). This makes it the stronger pick for content creation, rendering, and any multithreaded productivity suite.

The Intel Core i5-8400 is the choice only in one narrow scenario: the benchmark data shows it wins PassMark extended instructions by 9.3% (11543 vs 10470), suggesting a slight edge in SIMD-heavy code paths. It also carries a launch MSRP of $182, while the i7-10750H has no listed launch MSRP. However, the i5-8400 is end-of-life, runs at a 65W TDP versus 45W, and loses in every other measured category. For a desktop builder with an existing Socket 1151 board, the i5-8400’s 4.00 GHz boost clock and 2.80 GHz base clock provide adequate performance, but the i7-10750H’s 5.00 GHz boost and Hyper-Threading make it the superior silicon.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-10750H wins in every multithreaded and most single-threaded benchmarks. Its biggest victories are in CPU-intensive integer math, where it scores 39730 against 25573 (a 55.4% gap), and data encryption, where it leads 3930 to 2824 (a 39.2% margin). It also dominates in data compression (167213 vs 129951, +28.7%) and random string sorting (21416 vs 15952, +34.3%). These results point to a processor that excels at compression, encryption, and general-purpose compute tasks, making it ideal for laptops that double as portable workstations.

The Intel Core i5-8400’s sole benchmark win is PassMark extended instructions (11543 vs 10470, -9.3% for the i7-10750H). This test likely measures AVX2 or similar instruction-set extensions, where the older Coffee Lake architecture shows a slight advantage. In all other tests, the i5-8400 trails by margins ranging from 4.7% (Geekbench single-core: 1353 vs 1417) to 55.4% (PassMark integer math). For everyday desktop use like web browsing, office documents, or light gaming, the i5-8400’s 6 cores and 6 threads are sufficient, but it cannot match the i7-10750H’s throughput in heavily threaded applications.

Architecture Differences

Both processors use Intel’s 14 nm process node, but they belong to different generations and platforms. The Intel Core i7-10750H is a Comet Lake-H mobile chip on the Intel BGA 1440 socket, released in April 2020. It features 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. Its cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. Memory support is dual-channel DDR4 with a bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s, and it integrates UHD Graphics. The TDP is 45W, reflecting its mobile positioning.

The Intel Core i5-8400 is a Coffee Lake desktop chip on the Intel Socket 1151, released in October 2017. It also has 6 cores but only 6 threads, with a base clock of 2.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.00 GHz. Its cache is smaller: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 9 MB of shared L3. Memory bandwidth is lower at 42.7 GB/s, though it supports the same dual-channel DDR4. The integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 630, and the TDP is 65W. The die size is 154 mm², a figure not listed for the i7-10750H. Both CPUs support PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU and lack ECC memory support. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The key architectural difference is the thread count: the i7-10750H’s Hyper-Threading doubles threads to 12, while the i5-8400 runs 6 threads across 6 cores. This explains the i7-10750H’s consistent multi-core advantages, such as a 23.9% lead in Cinebench R20 multi-core (4081 vs 3295). The i7-10750H also has 3 MB more L3 cache and a higher boost clock, which contributes to its single-thread wins. The i5-8400’s higher base clock (2.80 GHz vs 2.60 GHz) does not compensate for its lower boost clock and missing Hyper-Threading.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has better multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i7-10750H wins every multi-core benchmark. It leads by 23.8% in Cinebench R23 multi-core (9718 vs 7847), 23.9% in Cinebench R20 multi-core (4081 vs 3295), and 25.9% in PassMark multithread (11616 vs 9225).

Q: Is the i5-8400 better in any benchmark?

A: Yes, the i5-8400 wins PassMark extended instructions by 9.3% (11543 vs 10470). This is the only head-to-head test out of 19 where it beats the i7-10750H.

Q: How do their single-threaded scores compare?

A: The i7-10750H leads in all single-threaded tests. It scores 2625 vs 2371 in PassMark single-thread (+10.7%), 1417 vs 1353 in Geekbench single-core (+4.7%), and 1372 vs 1107 in Cinebench R23 single-core (+23.9%).

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: Both have 6 cores, but the i7-10750H has 12 threads while the i5-8400 has 6 threads. The i7-10750H’s Hyper-Threading provides the extra threads.

Q: Which CPU is more power-efficient?

A: The i7-10750H has a 45W TDP, while the i5-8400 has a 65W TDP. The i7-10750H delivers higher performance at a lower thermal design power.

Q: What sockets do they use?

A: The i7-10750H uses Intel BGA 1440 (mobile), while the i5-8400 uses Intel Socket 1151 (desktop). They are not interchangeable.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the Intel Core i7-10750H is in PassMark integer math, where it scores 39730 against the i5-8400’s 25573, a massive 55.4% delta. This test highlights the benefit of 12 threads over 6 for integer-heavy workloads. Data encryption shows a 39.2% lead (3930 vs 2824), and random string sorting shows a 34.3% lead (21416 vs 15952). These three tests alone demonstrate the i7-10750H’s clear superiority in compute-heavy tasks.

The i7-10750H also wins all Cinebench tests by nearly identical margins: R15 multi-core is 979 vs 790 (+23.9%), R15 single-core is 138 vs 111 (+24.3%), R20 multi-core is 4081 vs 3295 (+23.9%), R20 single-core is 576 vs 464 (+24.1%), R23 multi-core is 9718 vs 7847 (+23.8%), and R23 single-core is 1372 vs 1107 (+23.9%). This consistency suggests a uniform architectural advantage in rendering and 3D workloads.

The i5-8400’s only win is PassMark extended instructions, where it scores 11543 versus 10470, a 9.3% margin. This is the single piece of evidence for the i5-8400’s superiority, and it is isolated to one specific instruction-set benchmark. In Geekbench, the i7-10750H wins multi-core by 9.6% (5574 vs 5088) and single-core by 4.7% (1417 vs 1353). PassMark physics also favors the i7-10750H (700 vs 635, +10.2%), as does floating-point math (25070 vs 22006, +13.9%) and data compression (167213 vs 129951, +28.7%). The overall record is 18 wins for the i7-10750H and 1 win for the i5-8400.