| | | | | | |

Core i5-10400F vs i9-10980XE


Description
The i5-10400F is based on Comet Lake architecture while the i9-10980XE is based on Cascade Lake.

Using the multithread performance as a reference, the i5-10400F gets a score of 370 k points while the i9-10980XE gets 1241.1 k points.

Summarizing, the i9-10980XE is 3.4 times faster than the i5-10400F. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.

Specs
CPUID
a0653
50657
Core
Comet Lake-S
Cascade Lake-X
Architecture
Base frecuency
2.9 GHz
3 GHz
Boost frecuency
4.3 GHz
4.8 GHz
Socket
LGA 1200
LGA 2066
Cores/Threads
6/12
18/36
TDP
65 W
165 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
6x32+6x32 kB
18x32+18x32 kB
Cache L2
6x256 kB
18x1024 kB
Cache L3
12288 kB
25344 kB
Date
April 2020
November 2019
Mean monothread perf.
68.14k points
68.33k points
Mean multithread perf.
369.97k points
1241.12k 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
i5-10400F
i9-10980XE
Test#1 (Integers)
4.3k
4.52k (x1.05)
Test#2 (FP)
16.56k
17.94k (x1.08)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.25k
5.5k (x1.05)
Test#1 (Memory)
12.61k
9.64k (x0.76)
TOTAL
38.72k
37.6k (x0.97)

Multithread

i5-10400F

i9-10980XE
Test#1 (Integers)
18.1k
84.93k (x4.69)
Test#2 (FP)
79.16k
409.55k (x5.17)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
26.75k
122.88k (x4.59)
Test#1 (Memory)
13.81k
22.12k (x1.6)
TOTAL
137.82k
639.48k (x4.64)

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
i5-10400F
i9-10980XE
Test#1 (Integers)
26.28k
29.53k (x1.12)
Test#2 (FP)
23.38k
22.59k (x0.97)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
5.52k
5.99k (x1.09)
Test#1 (Memory)
12.96k
10.22k (x0.79)
TOTAL
68.14k
68.33k (x1)

Multithread

i5-10400F

i9-10980XE
Test#1 (Integers)
163.67k
587.06k (x3.59)
Test#2 (FP)
159.74k
496.41k (x3.11)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
39k
134.66k (x3.45)
Test#1 (Memory)
7.56k
22.99k (x3.04)
TOTAL
369.97k
1241.12k (x3.35)

Performance/W
i5-10400F
i9-10980XE
Test#1 (Integers)
2518 points/W
3558 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
2457 points/W
3009 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
600 points/W
816 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
116 points/W
139 points/W
TOTAL
5692 points/W
7522 points/W

Performance/GHz
i5-10400F
i9-10980XE
Test#1 (Integers)
6112 points/GHz
6153 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5438 points/GHz
4707 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1283 points/GHz
1248 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
3014 points/GHz
2129 points/GHz
TOTAL
15847 points/GHz
14236 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