Intel Core i3-10100F vs Intel Core i5-7400

Processor comparisons 17-03-2021

   If you can't decide which CPU to buy, you can make a choice by looking at the Intel Core i3-10100F vs Intel Core i5-7400 tests and see which is better for games or simple use for programming, streaming, rendering, machine learning, video editing. Here is all information from real streaming and video editing tests or several benchmarks. A step-by-step analysis of all the specifications, to make it easier to understand, is presented in the form of the table.
   From the video comparison, you can get the results of parallel examination in software tests such as Dolphin Emulator, MATLAB, GeekBench 6, 5.2, PassMark, 7zip, Prime95, Furmark, Blender, Handbrake, UserBenchmark, DaVinci Resolve Studio, Cinebench 23 (20, 15), Gears 5, 3DMark, PCMark 10, SuperPi, RealBench, AIDA64, World of Tanks enCore Benchmark, Blender, WPrime, VeraCrypt.
   Gaming performance of CPUs in:

Fallout 76
Death Stranding
Cyberpunk 2077
Overwatch
World of Warcraft: Shadowlands
Rainbow Six Siege
Halo Infinite
Borderlands 3
Assassin's Creed Valhalla
Fortnite
Call of Duty: Warzone and Modern Warfare
Red Dead Redemption 2
Grand Theft Auto V
Apex Legends
Valorant
Valheim
Watch Dogs Legion
DOOM: Eternal
Last Man Standing

After looking at the data of parallel benchmarks and videos, you can already make an briefed decision about which CPU is better to buy for gaming Intel Core i5-7400 or Intel Core i3-10100F.

Summary benchmark results

As a percentage of the maximum value based on a sample from the entire base of all processors
Processor Benchmark

Core i3-10100F

52%

Core i5-7400

51%

This shows the performance of the processors in single-threaded and multi-threaded mode. In this comparison, Core i3-10100F is 1% better than Core i5-7400. The data source is several popular tests. More detailed information of the benchmarks is below.

Gaming performance
Summary result of all game benchmarks.

Core i3-10100F

52%

Core i5-7400

51%

For the maximum in this test, the results of the most powerful processor in the site database are taken. And it is clear that this is a server processor, on which no one will play games. Because the cost of this processor reaches several tens of thousands of dollars. And if it seems to you that the selected CPU has a small game result, just look at the FPS that it produces in real games in the summary table below.
List of less popular games in which CPU comparisons were performed: Half-Life: Alyx, Horizon Zero Dawn, Forza Horizon 4, Battlefield V, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CS GO), Metro Exodus, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, NBA 2K20, Control, Monster Hunter World, Microsoft Flight Simulator, Ghostrunner, League of Legends (LOL), DOTA 2A, Resident Evil 7 Biohazard, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG), Hitman 3.

Gaming benchmark

Fortnite	92.9	91.4
Valorant	105.6	103.9
Cyberpunk 2077	59.1	58.2
Apex Legends	99.2	97.6
Call of Duty Warzone	79.2	77.9
Overwatch	85.5	84.1
Red Dead Redemption 2	72.8	71.7
DOOM Eternal	52.8	51.9
Warzone	82.3	81.0
Assassin's Creed	88.7	87.3
Valheim	87.6	86.2

The numbers in this table indicate the maximum FPS that was received on the device with the corresponding processor. Depending on the configuration of the computer (RAM size and Video Card) and graphics quality settings (Ultra, Medium, Normal), the results may differ quite significantly. We recommend that you better study the results of the Cinebench, GeekBench and Passmark becnmarks.
The computers that were in the comparisons not only did they have different amounts of RAM and different video cards. But users also tested them at different screen resolutions: FullHD, 2K or 4K. So the game benchmark data is approximate. But all video cards met the average system requirements of games. To be sure exactly how much performance the processor will be in games, if you get acquainted with the benchmarks that are made with the same video card that is installed in your computer.

Power consumption

Core i3-10100F

58%

Core i5-7400

49%

To make a final decision on which processor is better, you should also consider the generation of its core. The newer the processor generation, the better its performance in games and benchmarks, as well as its energy efficiency. In this case the Core i3-10100F is more energy efficient than the Core i5-7400 since it has less power consumption: 65W vs. 65W. Power consumption is particularly important for laptops. Also, when choosing a processor cooling system, it will be useful to know its TDP. You need to buy a cooler that has the TDP data specified in the specification was greater than the TDP of the compared processor.

Software benchmarks

If you want to use the processor not only for gaming, but also for streaming, video rendering or video editing, programming, machine learning, then the main parameter for you is its performance in multi-threaded mode. In this mode, to achieve maximum performance, the CPU turns on all cores and threads that it has. You will learn this data from the benchmark tables below. Before you take into account the data from these tests, be sure to check whether the software you are going to use on your computer supports multi-threaded mode. Because there are still many programs that use only one core to run, and all the advantages of multi-core mode are unused.

Cinebench 23, 20 an 15
The results of this benchmark show Single-threaded and Multi-threaded CPU performance

	Intel Core i3-10100F	Intel Core i5-7400
Cinbench 15 Single-core	191	149
Cinbench 15 Multi-core	1001	564
Cinbench 20 Single-core	448	345
Cinbench 20 Multi-core	2284	1266
Cinbench 23 Single-core	1142	820
Cinbench 23 Multi-core	4436	2853

Passmark
This popular benchmark displays Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance

	Intel Core i3-10100F	Intel Core i5-7400
Single-Core	2585	2131
Multi-Core	8876	5499

GeekBench 6, 5.2
This benchmark shows Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance

	Intel Core i3-10100F	Intel Core i5-7400
Single-Core	1150	959
Multi-Core	4808	3349

Comparison of specifications

In the specification comparison table, the most helpful will be the the possibility of overclocking it and release date of the processor. The newer the processor, the longer it will last you. And the easier it will be to upgrade the system later. The same can be said about overclocking. If the processor can be overclocked, thereby increasing its performance, then it will still be able to produce maximum FPS in the newest games. The savings are obvious! Accordingly, you do not need to buy a new CPU to enjoy the games any longer.

	Intel Core i3-10100F	Intel Core i5-7400
Announcement date	October 01, 2020	January 01, 2017
Type	Desktop	Desktop
Socket	FCLGA1200	FCLGA1151
Core name	Comet Lake	Kaby Lake
Architecture	x86	x86
Generation	10	7
Turbo Frequency	4.3 MHz	3.5 MHz
Frequency	3.6 MHz	3 MHz
Cores	4	4
Threads	8	4
Bus rate	8 GT/s	8 GT/s
Bit	64	64
Lithography	14 nm	14 nm
Transistors count	2600 millions	2460 millions
Power consumption (TDP)	65 W	65 W
Memory type	DDR4-2666	DDR4-2133/2400, DDR3L-1333/1600 @ 1.35V
Max. Memory	128 Gb	64 Gb
Memory Frequency
Memory bandwidth	41.6 GB/s
L1 cache
L2 cache
L3 cache	6 MB	6 MB
Overclocking	Yes	Yes
Supports ECC	No	No
Part number

In this comparison block, you should pay attention to the differences in clock speed and the number of cores. Here Core i3-10100F is 16% better than Core i5-7400 in terms of CPU frequency. Also keep in mind that high CPU frequency affects battery life through power consumption (relevant for laptops).

Result:
The number of parameters for which Intel Core i3-10100F is better: 29
The number of parameters for which Intel Core i5-7400 is better: 0
However, it should be realized that all the figures in the article above do not mean that taking them into account you should totally trust a simple quantitative comparison. Better to watch the video tests and read the opinion of real owners of Intel Core i3-10100F and Intel Core i5-7400 before making a choice which of the processors to buy for gaming.

• Intel Core i3-10100F specs and review.

• Intel Core i5-7400 specs and review.