| | | | | | |

Core i5-1035G4 vs i5-10400F


Description
The i5-1035G4 is based on Ice Lake architecture while the i5-10400F is based on Comet Lake.

Using the multithread performance as a reference, the i5-1035G4 gets a score of 142.7 k points while the i5-10400F gets 370 k points.

Summarizing, the i5-10400F is 2.6 times faster than the i5-1035G4. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.

Specs
CPUID
706e5
a0653
Core
Ice Lake-U
Comet Lake-S
Architecture
Base frecuency
1.1 GHz
2.9 GHz
Boost frecuency
3.7 GHz
4.3 GHz
Socket
BGA 1526
LGA 1200
Cores/Threads
4/8
6/12
TDP
15 W
65 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
4x32+4x48 kB
6x32+6x32 kB
Cache L2
4x512 kB
6x256 kB
Cache L3
6144 kB
12288 kB
Date
August 2019
April 2020
Mean monothread perf.
65.64k points
68.14k points
Mean multithread perf.
142.69k points
369.97k points

Non-optimized benchmark
The benchmark in Mode 0 (FPU) measures cpu performance with non-optimized software. It uses the basic µinstructions from the i386 architecture with the i387 floating point unit. This mode is compatible with all CPUs so it's practical to compare very different CPUs
Monothread
i5-1035G4
i5-10400F
Test#1 (Integers)
4.05k
4.3k (x1.06)
Test#2 (FP)
15.29k
16.56k (x1.08)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
9.04k
5.25k (x0.58)
Test#1 (Memory)
10.54k
12.61k (x1.2)
TOTAL
38.92k
38.72k (x0.99)

Multithread

i5-1035G4

i5-10400F
Test#1 (Integers)
9.05k
18.1k (x2)
Test#2 (FP)
33.88k
79.16k (x2.34)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
15.34k
26.75k (x1.74)
Test#1 (Memory)
6.74k
13.81k (x2.05)
TOTAL
65.01k
137.82k (x2.12)

AVX2 optimized benchmark
The benchmark in mode III (AVX2), like AVX1, is optimized to used 256 bits registers beside the second version of the Advanced Vector Extensions (AVX). The first AVX2 compatible CPU was released in 2013.
Monothread
i5-1035G4
i5-10400F
Test#1 (Integers)
25.53k
26.28k (x1.03)
Test#2 (FP)
19.99k
23.38k (x1.17)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
9.31k
5.52k (x0.59)
Test#1 (Memory)
10.81k
12.96k (x1.2)
TOTAL
65.64k
68.14k (x1.04)

Multithread

i5-1035G4

i5-10400F
Test#1 (Integers)
58.46k
163.67k (x2.8)
Test#2 (FP)
57.31k
159.74k (x2.79)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
20.1k
39k (x1.94)
Test#1 (Memory)
6.81k
7.56k (x1.11)
TOTAL
142.69k
369.97k (x2.59)

Performance/W
i5-1035G4
i5-10400F
Test#1 (Integers)
3897 points/W
2518 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
3821 points/W
2457 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1340 points/W
600 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
454 points/W
116 points/W
TOTAL
9513 points/W
5692 points/W

Performance/GHz
i5-1035G4
i5-10400F
Test#1 (Integers)
6901 points/GHz
6112 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5401 points/GHz
5438 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
2515 points/GHz
1283 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
2922 points/GHz
3014 points/GHz
TOTAL
17739 points/GHz
15847 points/GHz

Monothread performance graph
Monothread performance graphics gives the performance vs time. They are useful to measure the time it takes to the CPU to reach the maximum performance.

Usually, CPU's performance will be steady during these tests but if it has a slow frequency strategy, the first samples will show a lower score.


Test#1 (Integers) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#2 (FP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#3 (Generic, ZIP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#1 (Memory) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com

Multithread performance graph
Multithread graphs measure the performance against a heavy load during certain time.

If CPU's TDP doesn't limit the frequency and the machine is properly cooled, performance should remain steady vs time. Otherwise, the performance score will oscillate or decrease over time.


Test#1 (Integers) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#2 (FP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#3 (Generic, ZIP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#1 (Memory) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com

Hardlimit Benchmark Central - Ver. 3.11.4