• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Intel Core i5-10400 Pictured and Detailed, New Mid-range Gaming Champion in the Making?

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
38,235 (8.39/day)
Location
Hyderabad, India
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
Motherboard ASUS ROG Strix B450-E Gaming
Cooling AMD Wraith Prism
Memory 2x 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4-3000
Video Card(s) Palit GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER GameRock
Storage Western Digital Black NVMe 512GB
Display(s) BenQ 1440p 60 Hz 27-inch
Case Corsair Carbide 100R
Audio Device(s) Creative Sound Blaster Recon3D PCIe
Power Supply Cooler Master MWE Gold 650W
Mouse ASUS ROG Strix Impact
Keyboard Microsoft Sidewinder X4
Software Windows 10 Pro
Here are two of the first pictures of Intel's upcoming Core i5-10400 processor, based on the company's 10th generation, 14 nm "Comet Lake-S" silicon. With its 10th generation, Intel is looking to bolster its Core i5 desktop processor series by introducing HyperThreading and increased L3 cache to existing price-points. The i5-10400 is hence a 6-core/12-thread processor with 12 MB of shared L3 cache at its disposal, compared to 9th and 8th generation Core i5 desktop chips being 6-core/6-thread with 9 MB of L3 cache.

The Core i5-10400 succeeds the popular Core i5-9400/F and its equally popular predecessor, the i5-8400. The iGPU-devoid i5-9400F in particular owed its popularity to Intel pricing it $15-20 less than the standard i5-9400. The upcoming i5-10400 is expected to be priced under the $200 mark, with the i5-10400F being similarly discounted. Both chips feature identical CPU specs: 2.90 GHz nominal clock speeds, up to 4.30 GHz maximum Turbo Boost, and 4.00 GHz all-core Turbo Boost. As the chip lacks an unlocked multiplier, its TDP is reportedly rated at 65 W. The chip will compete with AMD's Ryzen 5 3600 for sub-$200 supremacy. The 10th generation Core desktop processor family is built in the new LGA1200 package, and launches alongside the new Intel 400-series chipset, in April.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2010
Messages
4,602 (1.31/day)
So basically a potentially 199$ Core i7 8700 equiv CPU.
Which is totally fine btw, its plenty capable and powerful CPU.

Thing is, it seems like we will go into a cat and mouse with how this can compete with the 3600 and its replacement later this year in terms of pricing and availabilities. I do fully expect a fierce competition from AMD seeing how even the 3600X touched the 210$ price point several times, and possibly comes as a more complete package to those looking for an affordable, already-existing eco system and maybe some OC shananignas for fun.

The only thing im truly sad about is that there aint too much fun to be had with those "new" Intel CPUs. We know eactly what we are going to get, and there is no element of surprise... well, we didn't have one anyway for some years now from them but there's that. Somwhere i have hopes the F variant can be compelling at sub 179$
 
Joined
Jun 19, 2010
Messages
207 (0.06/day)
Location
North-Rhine-Westphalia
Processor Ryzen 2700
Motherboard B450
Cooling Thermalright ARO
Memory 2x 8GB DDR4-2133
Video Card(s) RX 570 8GB
Storage 256GB SSD
Display(s) UHD 40" HDR TV
Case Sharkoon AM5 Window red
Audio Device(s) USB Headset
Power Supply beQuiet PurePower10 400W
Software Win10
The mentioned 4GHz All-Core Boost comes well into place regarding the about ~ 4150 MHz Boost of the Ryzen 3600 and a still present slight "IPC"-advantage Intel has.
Additionally i don't want to deny Intels ability to have changed their Boostbehaviour and make all-core boost of more than the advertised available for a short or medium timespan.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
3,008 (1.18/day)
The mentioned 4GHz All-Core Boost comes well into place regarding the about ~ 4150 MHz Boost of the Ryzen 3600 and a still present slight "IPC"-advantage Intel has.
Additionally i don't want to deny Intels ability to have changed their Boostbehaviour and make all-core boost of more than the advertised available for a short or medium timespan.
And the 3600 can always be OCed, not to mention the boost clocks of the i5 will likely depend on the motherboard as is the case with all locked Intel chips so it can vary a lot from one board to another. Intel doesn't have an IPC advantage wrt Zen 2, AMD has decisively overtaken them at least on the desktop!
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2014
Messages
11,362 (5.63/day)
Location
Mars
Processor i7 8700k 4.7Ghz @ 1.26v
Motherboard AsRock Fatal1ty K6 Z370
Cooling beQuiet! Dark Rock Pro 3
Memory 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200/C16
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X @ 2100/5500
Storage Samsung 850 EVO 1TB + Samsung 830 256GB + Crucial BX100 250GB + Toshiba 1TB HDD
Display(s) Eizo Foris FG2421
Case Fractal Design Define C TG
Power Supply EVGA G2 750w
Mouse Logitech G502 Protheus Spectrum
Keyboard Sharkoon MK80 (Brown)
Software W10 x64
Bwahahah that base clock and this turbo?

I'm out, need to cuddle my 8700K.

This isn't a gaming champ. 4.3 Ghz is a clock from 2013. Even the 8700 non K does 4.6. This thing can't even compete on price at 200 bucks... and HT is worse than a full fat 8 core, especially at lower clock.
 

ppn

Joined
Aug 18, 2015
Messages
642 (0.38/day)
Intels IPC at same clocks 4.0 vs 4.0Ghz is probably lower at this point. Can't wait the tests.
9400F is priced $157, 10400F must be $25 more or so.
 
Joined
Nov 24, 2017
Messages
654 (0.76/day)
Location
Asia
Processor Intel Core i5 4590
Motherboard Gigabyte Z97x Gaming 3
Cooling Intel Stock Cooler
Memory 8GB(2x4GB) DDR3-800MHz [1600MT/s]
Video Card(s) XFX RX 560 4GB
Storage Transcend SSD370S 128GB; Toshiba DT01ACA100 1TB
Display(s) Samsung S20D300 20" 768p TN
Case Delux DLC-MV888
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1150
Power Supply Corsair VS450
Mouse A4Tech N-70FX
Software Windows 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores BaseMark GPU : 250 Point
The mentioned 4GHz All-Core Boost comes well into place regarding the about ~ 4150 MHz Boost of the Ryzen 3600 and a still present slight "IPC"-advantage Intel has.
Additionally i don't want to deny Intels ability to have changed their Boostbehaviour and make all-core boost of more than the advertised available for a short or medium timespan.
Looks like lots of people still dont understand IPC. IPC = Instruction Per Clock/Cycle, simple term -> the average number of instructions executed for each clock cycle.
Intel currently has less IPC than AMD, but slightly better performence because of higher average clock speed.
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2014
Messages
11,362 (5.63/day)
Location
Mars
Processor i7 8700k 4.7Ghz @ 1.26v
Motherboard AsRock Fatal1ty K6 Z370
Cooling beQuiet! Dark Rock Pro 3
Memory 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200/C16
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X @ 2100/5500
Storage Samsung 850 EVO 1TB + Samsung 830 256GB + Crucial BX100 250GB + Toshiba 1TB HDD
Display(s) Eizo Foris FG2421
Case Fractal Design Define C TG
Power Supply EVGA G2 750w
Mouse Logitech G502 Protheus Spectrum
Keyboard Sharkoon MK80 (Brown)
Software W10 x64
Looks like lots of people still dont understand IPC. IPC = Instruction Per Clock/Cycle, simple term -> the average number of instructions executed for each clock cycle.
Intel currently has less IPC than AMD, but slightly better performence because of higher average clock speed.
IPC varies per application. Raw IPC cannot always be utilized and that specifically goes for gaming. That is why clocks still matter. More clock = more instructions *per second* :)

But you're right, Zen has a lead now and can do more with lower clock in many instances.
 
Joined
Oct 10, 2018
Messages
284 (0.53/day)
I have been defending Intel against AMD since the launch of Ryzen 3000 series. lately, I`m finding it difficult to back them up, just waiting for their 10th gen to launch and see reviews before I make a judgement.
 

FreedomEclipse

~Technological Technocrat~
Joined
Apr 20, 2007
Messages
20,304 (4.30/day)
Location
London,UK
System Name Codename: Icarus Mk.V
Processor Intel 8600k@4.8Ghz
Motherboard Asus ROG Strixx Z370-F
Cooling CPU: BeQuiet! Dark Rock Pro 4 {1xCorsair ML120 Pro|5xML140 Pro}
Memory 16 Corsair Vengeance White LED DDR4 3200Mhz {2x8GB}
Video Card(s) Gigabyte 1080Ti Gaming OC|Accelero Xtreme IV
Storage Samsung 970Evo 512GB SSD (Boot)|WD Blue 1TB SSD|2x 3TB Toshiba DT01ACA300
Display(s) Asus PB278Q 27"
Case Corsair 760T (White)
Audio Device(s) Yamaha RX-V573|Speakers: JBL Control One|Auna 300-CN|Wharfedale Diamond SW150
Power Supply Corsair AX760
Mouse Logitech G900/G502
Keyboard Duckyshine Dead LED(s) III
Software Windows 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores (ノಠ益ಠ)ノ彡┻━┻
Joined
Oct 10, 2018
Messages
284 (0.53/day)
where are these made? I`m going to try to make a system that is not made in china. would be a very hard task. but have to start somewhere.
 

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
7,268 (4.10/day)
Processor Intel i5-6600k (AMD Ryzen5 3600 in a box, waiting for a mobo)
Motherboard ASRock Z170 Extreme7+
Cooling Arctic Cooling Freezer i11
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V (@3200)
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 3TB Seagate
Display(s) HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
And the 3600 can always be OCed, not to mention the boost clocks of the i5 will likely depend on the motherboard as is the case with all locked Intel chips so it can vary a lot from one board to another. Intel doesn't have an IPC advantage wrt Zen 2, AMD has decisively overtaken them at least on the desktop!
Sadly, no. All AMD CPUs are unlocked, but their power management does such a good job out of the box, there's not much left for a manual overclock to squeeze out of those CPUs.
A huge win imho, but one that takes all the fun out of "multiplier unlocked" CPUs.
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2012
Messages
1,323 (0.50/day)
Midrange gaming champion.....
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Are you serious? A locked 4 GHz 6 core intel chip? Without its 4.6+ GHz clock rates, Intel cant compete with AMD in gaming, and it already loses in almost everything else. The 3600 is going to crush this thing in perf/$ and likely match it or exceed it in overall performance, and its been out for a year already, and the ryzen 4600 will likely curbstomp the intel chip across the board. Unless intell pulled a rabbit out of their hat with that extra L3 cache, this thing will be slower then the 9600K, 9600KF, 8700K, 8700, and 9600.
 
Joined
Aug 23, 2013
Messages
122 (0.05/day)
Not only it will have to compete with 3600x, but with 2700x that is even cheaper.
 
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
848 (0.77/day)
Location
Tanagra
Processor AMD 2700X
Motherboard Gigabyte B450M DS3H
Cooling Scythe Mugen 5
Memory G.Skill 16GB DDR4 @ 3200
Video Card(s) Asrock RX 5700 XT 8GB
Storage Inland 512GB NVMe
Display(s) LG 27UL500-W
Case NZXT H510
Audio Device(s) My ears
Power Supply EVGA 500W
Software Windows 10
I can get the 9600K for $200. While it lacks SMT, it at least is unlocked and has a higher boost. I guess I was expecting Intel to use it’s clock speed advantage more, not just enable SMT. Maybe the higher models will be doing lore of that?
 

ARF

Joined
Jan 28, 2020
Messages
315 (5.25/day)
System Name ARF System 1
Processor AMD Athlon 64 4400+ X2
Motherboard ASRock 939A790GMH 790GX
Cooling Arctic Freezer 13
Memory 4 x 1 GB DDR400
Video Card(s) Radeon ASUS EAH4670/DI/512MD3
Storage ADATA XPG SX900 128 GB
Display(s) LG 24UD58-B
Case Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus
Software Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 64-bit, all updates installed
IPC varies per application. Raw IPC cannot always be utilized and that specifically goes for gaming. That is why clocks still matter. More clock = more instructions *per second* :)

But you're right, Zen has a lead now and can do more with lower clock in many instances.
IPC is measured at equal clock, for instance 3.5 GHz:




Looks like lots of people still dont understand IPC. IPC = Instruction Per Clock/Cycle, simple term -> the average number of instructions executed for each clock cycle.
Intel currently has less IPC than AMD, but slightly better performence because of higher average clock speed.
Because of better software optimisation for Intel in gaming. Games usually don't touch or use more than 6-8 cores and when they do so, they jump between the cores like crazy.
 

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
7,268 (4.10/day)
Processor Intel i5-6600k (AMD Ryzen5 3600 in a box, waiting for a mobo)
Motherboard ASRock Z170 Extreme7+
Cooling Arctic Cooling Freezer i11
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V (@3200)
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 3TB Seagate
Display(s) HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
Midrange gaming champion.....
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Are you serious? A locked 4 GHz 6 core intel chip? Without its 4.6+ GHz clock rates, Intel cant compete with AMD in gaming, and it already loses in almost everything else. The 3600 is going to crush this thing in perf/$ and likely match it or exceed it in overall performance, and its been out for a year already, and the ryzen 4600 will likely curbstomp the intel chip across the board. Unless intell pulled a rabbit out of their hat with that extra L3 cache, this thing will be slower then the 9600K, 9600KF, 8700K, 8700, and 9600.
I'm not sure what you're talking about. AMD and Intel have similar IPC and by the looks of it, about the same clocks. Zen2 can't be pushed much over its out-of-the-box parameters, Intel traditionally can (these are locked, so they won't overclock like a 9600k, we'll have to wait and see). So no, 3600 will not crush this, it will match it, best case scenario.
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2012
Messages
1,323 (0.50/day)
IPC is measured at equal clock, for instance 3.5 GHz:






Because of better software optimisation for Intel in gaming. Games usually don't touch or use more than 6-8 cores and when they do so, they jump between the cores like crazy.
That's hardly an optimization for intel. Jumping cores constantly is going to result in worse performance, no matter the arch. Intel simply benefits from higher clock rates and lower inter core latency, so the issue is not as pronounced as it is on AMD hardware.

This is the result of game developers trying to get multi core performance out of tasks that are not naturally parallel tasks.

I'm not sure what you're talking about. AMD and Intel have similar IPC and by the looks of it, about the same clocks. Zen2 can't be pushed much over its out-of-the-box parameters, Intel traditionally can (these are locked, so they won't overclock like a 9600k, we'll have to wait and see). So no, 3600 will not crush this, it will match it, best case scenario.
The whole whopping 1-2% faster the Intel chips will manage, based on TPU's 3600 review, will not justify the intel chip being $200 VS the 3600's $175. The AMD chip will dominate in perf/$. The I5-9400F is the most comparable to the 10400, and it was a whopping 2.7% faster at 720p. This was all before AMD fixed the boost clock issues with ryzen 3000. Especially considering that current I5-9600s can be had for $200 with a 300 mhz higher core clock, this 10400 looks DOA for anyone not rocking an old quad core, and then those quad core users would be better served with a cheaper ryzen 3000 6 core that can be upgraded to a ryzen 4000 series at the end of the year.

1-2% more performance for 12.5% more $$$, or less performance for same $$$ as the previous gen intel chips. Not a great look for the intel chip.
 
Last edited:

ARF

Joined
Jan 28, 2020
Messages
315 (5.25/day)
System Name ARF System 1
Processor AMD Athlon 64 4400+ X2
Motherboard ASRock 939A790GMH 790GX
Cooling Arctic Freezer 13
Memory 4 x 1 GB DDR400
Video Card(s) Radeon ASUS EAH4670/DI/512MD3
Storage ADATA XPG SX900 128 GB
Display(s) LG 24UD58-B
Case Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus
Software Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 64-bit, all updates installed
That's hardly an optimization for intel. Jumping cores constantly is going to result in worse performance, no matter the arch. Intel simply benefits from higher clock rates and lower inter core latency, so the issue is not as pronounced as it is on AMD hardware.

This is the result of game developers trying to get multi core performance out of tasks that are not naturally parallel tasks.
They don't have to switch a serial task between the cores. They need more cores and every single core attached to a particular task - main thread, sounds thread, AI thread 1... AI thread n, physics thread 1... physics thread n and so on and so forth.
 
Joined
Jul 9, 2015
Messages
2,122 (1.23/day)
System Name My all round PC
Processor i5 750
Motherboard ASUS P7P55D-E
Memory 8GB
Video Card(s) Sapphire 380 OC... sold, waiting for Navi
Storage 256GB Samsung SSD + 2Tb + 1.5Tb
Display(s) Samsung 40" A650 TV
Case Thermaltake Chaser mk-I Tower
Power Supply 425w Enermax MODU 82+
Software Windows 10
Gaming champion, chuckle.
 

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
7,268 (4.10/day)
Processor Intel i5-6600k (AMD Ryzen5 3600 in a box, waiting for a mobo)
Motherboard ASRock Z170 Extreme7+
Cooling Arctic Cooling Freezer i11
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V (@3200)
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 3TB Seagate
Display(s) HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
The whole whopping 1-2% faster the Intel chips will manage, based on TPU's 3600 review, will not justify the intel chip being $200 VS the 3600's $175. The AMD chip will dominate in perf/$. The I5-9400F is the most comparable to the 10400, and it was a whopping 2.7% faster at 720p. This was all before AMD fixed the boost clock issues with ryzen 3000. Especially considering that current I5-9600s can be had for $200 with a 300 mhz higher core clock, this 10400 looks DOA for anyone not rocking an old quad core, and then those quad core users would be better served with a cheaper ryzen 3000 6 core that can be upgraded to a ryzen 4000 series at the end of the year.

1-2% more performance for 12.5% more $$$, or less performance for same $$$ as the previous gen intel chips. Not a great look for the intel chip.
Ah, I see. You're comparing Ryzen's street price to Intel's MSRP. 3600's MSRP is also $200.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2016
Messages
45 (0.03/day)
Location
Earth
Under $200 really, did we all forget that this requires the new LGA1200 socket? That new MB cost needs to be added to the pricing for a majority of people moving up from a previous Intel platform. So I have both Intel and AMD systems and with my X370 MB I can drop in a 1st gen - 3rd gen Ryzen CPU, can't do that with Intel. My Intel system will not be upgraded anytime soon as I am still on a 6700K (LGA1151). Now on AMD I would lose some features but the newest Ryzen CPU works and does not REQUIRE a platform change. My X370 started with a 1700X and now has a 2700X without buying anything more than just the CPU.
 

Regeneration

NGOHQ.COM
Joined
Oct 26, 2005
Messages
996 (0.19/day)
You shouldn't consider this processor as long as overclocking is restricted to certain chipsets and models.

AMD had poor offerings when Intel banned overclocking in 2016. But now, there is an alternative.

Regardless of benchmarks and pricing, we should all give Intel the middle finger and go with AMD.
 

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
7,268 (4.10/day)
Processor Intel i5-6600k (AMD Ryzen5 3600 in a box, waiting for a mobo)
Motherboard ASRock Z170 Extreme7+
Cooling Arctic Cooling Freezer i11
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V (@3200)
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 3TB Seagate
Display(s) HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
Under $200 really, did we all forget that this requires the new LGA1200 socket? That new MB cost needs to be added to the pricing for a majority of people moving up from a previous Intel platform. So I have both Intel and AMD systems and with my X370 MB I can drop in a 1st gen - 3rd gen Ryzen CPU, can't do that with Intel. My Intel system will not be upgraded anytime soon as I am still on a 6700K (LGA1151). Now on AMD I would lose some features but the newest Ryzen CPU works and does not REQUIRE a platform change. My X370 started with a 1700X and now has a 2700X without buying anything more than just the CPU.
Well, if you don't already have an AM4 motherboard, you'll have to buy a motherboard regardless.
More generally, when talking CPUs it's actually ok to limit yourself to CPU prices ;)
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2014
Messages
11,362 (5.63/day)
Location
Mars
Processor i7 8700k 4.7Ghz @ 1.26v
Motherboard AsRock Fatal1ty K6 Z370
Cooling beQuiet! Dark Rock Pro 3
Memory 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200/C16
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X @ 2100/5500
Storage Samsung 850 EVO 1TB + Samsung 830 256GB + Crucial BX100 250GB + Toshiba 1TB HDD
Display(s) Eizo Foris FG2421
Case Fractal Design Define C TG
Power Supply EVGA G2 750w
Mouse Logitech G502 Protheus Spectrum
Keyboard Sharkoon MK80 (Brown)
Software W10 x64
IPC is measured at equal clock, for instance 3.5 GHz:






Because of better software optimisation for Intel in gaming. Games usually don't touch or use more than 6-8 cores and when they do so, they jump between the cores like crazy.
Measured. Per application. In this case Cinebench. These results do not translate to having all CPUs running a game at 3.5 Ghz. Not even remotely - note also that this is a single thread test. Barely any application scales equally or linear across multiple threads. The more you add, the more overhead. And then comes the fact that every thread a game uses is completely different, whereas Cinebench threads are the exact same job.
 
Top