i5-10400F vs Apple M1 Pro
Aggregate performance score
Apple M1 Pro outperforms Core i5-10400F by a substantial 32% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Apple M1 Pro and Core i5-10400F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 713 | 917 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 12 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 23.08 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Apple M-Series | no data |
| Power efficiency | no data | 11.94 |
| Architecture codename | no data | Comet Lake (2020) |
| Release date | 18 October 2021 (3 years ago) | 30 April 2020 (4 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $155 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Apple M1 Pro and Core i5-10400F basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 10 (Deca-Core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 10 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | 2.064 GHz | 2.9 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.22 GHz | 4.3 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 8 GT/s |
| L1 cache | 2.9 MB | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 28 MB | 256K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 24 MB | 12 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 14 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 72 °C |
| Number of transistors | 33700 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | + |
Compatibility
Information on Apple M1 Pro and Core i5-10400F compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | no data | 1 |
| Socket | no data | FCLGA1200 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 2064 ‑ 3220 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Apple M1 Pro and Core i5-10400F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | - |
Security technologies
Apple M1 Pro and Core i5-10400F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| Identity Protection | - | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® ME |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Apple M1 Pro and Core i5-10400F are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Apple M1 Pro and Core i5-10400F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 128 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 41.6 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Apple M1 Pro 16-Core GPU | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Apple M1 Pro and Core i5-10400F.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 16 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.
Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core
Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.
Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core
Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core
WebXPRT 3
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 10.82 | 8.20 |
| Recency | 18 October 2021 | 30 April 2020 |
| Physical cores | 10 | 6 |
| Threads | 10 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 2064 Watt | 65 Watt |
Apple M1 Pro has a 32% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, 66.7% more physical cores, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.
i5-10400F, on the other hand, has 20% more threads, and 3075.4% lower power consumption.
The Apple M1 Pro is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i5-10400F in performance tests.
Be aware that Apple M1 Pro is a notebook processor while Core i5-10400F is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Apple M1 Pro and Core i5-10400F, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
