Intel i5 10400F Vs Ryzen 5 3600: We Tested Both

See full bio

Uzair Qureshi

At Tech4Gamers, I proudly wear the title of Comparisons Specialist. Focused on CPUs and GPUs, I bring forth a wealth of hands-on experience and a keen eye for detail to provide our audience with the latest insights and analyses.

See full bio

Pros And Cons

Comparison Table

Architectural Differences

1. Process Node: The Core i5 10400F makes use of an advanced 7nm processing node, while the 10400F uses a more ancient 14nm processing node.
2. Cores Count: Both processors support 6 performance cores which add up to 12 threads.
3. Clock Speed: The 10400F has a base frequency of 2.9GHz, a bit lower than the 3600’s base of 3.6GHz. The boost clocks of the 3600 and 10400F are 4.2GHz and 4.3GHz, respectively.
4. L3 cache: The Ryzen 5 3600 has a larger L3 cache of 32 megabytes, whereas the 10400F has a cache of 12 megabytes.

AMD remains the value-for-money king in the world of CPUs and GPUs, but it seems Intel has finally thought of giving the team red a run for its money. This Core i5 10400F vs Ryzen 5 3600 comparison will pit both competitors against each other and see which processor you should go for.

Gaming Benchmarks – 1080p

To test the Core i5 10400F vs Ryzen 5 3600, we have constructed a test bench that keeps only these chips as the potential point of failure. The specifications of this test bench are written below:

Testing Rig

• Motherboard 1: MSI MAG Z490 Tomahawk
• Motherboard 2: Gigabyte X570 Aorus Pro Wifi
• GPU: ASUS Strix RTX 2080
• Storage Drive: XPG Gammix S70 Blade 2TB NVMe
• Power Supply: Antec Earthwatts 650W
• Cooler: Deepcool Gammaxx GT
• Memory: Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro (2x16GB) – 3200MHz

If you fancy a standalone look at the processor, you can check out our review of the Ryzen 5 3600.

PUBG

• The 10400F had an average framerate around 5% higher than the 3600 at 135 FPS instead of 128 FPS.
• There was a jarring 15% difference between the 1% lows of the two chips, with the 3600 shooting down to 87 FPS, while the 10400F had lows of around 100 FPS.

Assassin’s Creed Odyssey

• Assassin’s Creed Odyssey showed a 6% difference between the performance of these chips, with the 3600 running with an average framerate of 87 FPS, while the 10400F had 92 FPS.
• The minimum framerates were higher on the 10400F at around 69 FPS, whereas the 3600 had lows of around 60 FPS.

SnowRunner

• The averages showed the 10400F to be in a lead of around 9% in this game, getting a framerate of 187 FPS instead of the 172 FPS of the Ryzen.
• As for the 1% lows, the AMD chip proved to be around 9% faster with dips to 93 FPS, while the 10400F got down to around 85 FPS.

Call Of Duty: Warzone

• The difference in framerate was almost negligible in CoD Warzone, with the Intel chip getting an average framerate of around 148 FPS, while the 3600 had a framerate of 144 FPS.
• 1% lows were also pretty close, with the 3600 hanging around the 80 FPS mark, while the 10400F had lows of around 83 FPS.

Metro Exodus

• The i5 10400F maintained its lead with a 5% better performance in this game. It had an average framerate of 115 FPS, while the Ryzen 5 3600 held around 109 FPS.
• Coming to the minimum framerates, the Ryzen 5 3600 had lows of around 74 FPS, around 13% lower than the 84 FPS lows of the 10400F.

Battlefield V

• The 10400F had an average framerate of 162 FPS in this game, around 6% higher than the 153 FPS average of the Ryzen 5 3600.
• The 1% lows seemed to be around 9% apart, with the 3600 hovering around 84 FPS, while the 10400F had lows closer to 92 FPS.

Hitman 2

• Our test of Hitman 2 showed the 10400F getting an average framerate of around 89 FPS, which was 3% higher than the 3600’s average of 86 FPS.
• The 1% lows were nearly identical on both chips, with the Ryzen hovering around 62 FPS, while the 10400F had lows closer to 63 FPS.

The Witcher 3

• Finally, the last game of our testing showed the 10400F getting a framerate of around 149 FPS on average, while the 3600 had an average of around 144 FPS.
• The 1% lows were about the same on both chips, with the 3600 going down to 100 FPS in some scenes, while the 10400F went to around 101 FPS.

Overall Gaming Performance

We saw only a 5% difference going from the 10400F to the 3600, with the Intel processor being in the lead most of the time. The i5 definitely ran games smoother, but the effect of these few extra frames is debatable.

Thermal Efficiency

There was only a small 5% difference between the thermal output of these chips, with the Intel processor being a bit cooler. For most people, such a small difference does not pose an issue, at least in gaming scenarios.

Pricing And Availability

Both processors can be had for very cheap due to their age, which allows them to be great for budget builds. The 3600X is a bit cheaper than the 10400F, but not to the extent where stretching your budget a bit would be impossible.

What We Recommend

Core i5 10400F: The 10400F performs admirably considering its age. Keeping its budget price in mind, it would be safe to assume that most people buying this chip will be playing at 1080p with a weak-ish GPU, where its performance gives it an edge over its competitor.

Ryzen 5 3600: The Ryzen 5 3600 gives consumers to get a little bit less performance, whilst having a price tag that is a little bit lower. It still stands as a respectable choice for a budget processor.

To conclude, if you want to spend the extra $15 or so, the 10400F should be the better choice, while the 3600 can give a similar performance for a price that is a hair lower.

Uzair Qureshi

[Comparisons Specialist]

I’m a passionate computer hardware expert specializing in CPUs and GPUs. With a lifelong curiosity for hardware and extensive hands-on experience, I provide valuable insights, practical advice, and in-depth analysis on these components. Engaging with the hardware community, I exchange knowledge and stay at the forefront of technological advancements.

Get In Touch: uzair@old.tech4gamers.com