
A4-6210

Core i5-13400F
A4-6210 vs Core i5-13400F Performance Spectrum
About PassMark
PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.
A4-6210 vs Core i5-13400F FPS Benchmarks
Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.
Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Valorant

Among Us

Apex Legends

ARC Raiders

Baldur's Gate 3

Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
A4-6210 vs Core i5-13400F: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
A4-6210
2014Why buy it
- ✅Draws 15W instead of 65W, a 50W reduction.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon R3, while Core i5-13400F needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (1,499 vs 25,029).
- ❌Older platform position on FT3, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Core i5-13400F
2023Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +470.4% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of FT3 and older memory support.
- ✅150% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike A4-6210.
Trade-offs
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $196 MSRP, while A4-6210 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌333.3% higher power demand at 65W vs 15W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while A4-6210 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i5-13400F better than A4-6210?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
A4-6210 vs Core i5-13400F Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

A4-6210
The A4-6210 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Beema (2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Max frequency: 1.8 GHz. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT3. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1599. Passmark benchmark score: 1,499 points. Launch price was $50.

Core i5-13400F
The Core i5-13400F is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 January 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture. It features 10 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 4.6 GHz. L3 cache: 20 MB (total). L2 cache: 1.25 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR5, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 25,029 points. Launch price was $196.
Processing Power
The A4-6210 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i5-13400F offers 10 cores / 16 threads — the Core i5-13400F has 6 more cores. Boost clocks reach 1.8 GHz on the A4-6210 versus 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F — a 87.5% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F. The A4-6210 uses the Beema (2014) architecture (28 nm), while the Core i5-13400F uses Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) (Intel 7 nm). In PassMark, the A4-6210 scores 1,499 against the Core i5-13400F's 25,029 — a 177.4% lead for the Core i5-13400F. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 198 vs 2,407, a 169.6% lead for the Core i5-13400F that directly translates to higher frame rates.
| Feature | A4-6210 | Core i5-13400F |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 4 / 4 | 10 / 16+150% |
| Boost Clock | 1.8 GHz | 4.6 GHz+156% |
| Base Clock | — | 2.5 GHz |
| L3 Cache | — | 20 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 2048 kB+60% | 1.25 MB (per core) |
| Process | 28 nm | Intel 7 nm-75% |
| Architecture | Beema (2014) | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) |
| PassMark | 1,499 | 25,029+1570% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | — | 16,211 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 198 | 2,407+1116% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 11,408 |
Memory & Platform
The A4-6210 uses the FT3 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i5-13400F uses LGA1700 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3L-1600 on the A4-6210 versus DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-13400F — the Core i5-13400F supports 200% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i5-13400F supports up to 192 GB of RAM compared to 16 GB — 1100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (A4-6210) vs 2 (Core i5-13400F). PCIe lanes: 8 (A4-6210) vs 20 (Core i5-13400F) — the Core i5-13400F offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.
| Feature | A4-6210 | Core i5-13400F |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FT3 | LGA1700 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 5.0+67% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3L-1600 | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200+200% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB | 192 GB+1100% |
| RAM Channels | 1 | 2+100% |
| ECC Support | No | No |
| PCIe Lanes | 8 | 20+150% |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A4-6210) vs VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F). The A4-6210 includes integrated graphics (Radeon R3), while the Core i5-13400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-6210 targets Entry Laptop, Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: A4-6210 rivals Pentium N3700; Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.
| Feature | A4-6210 | Core i5-13400F |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | Radeon R3 | — |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | VT-x, VT-d |
| Target Use | Entry Laptop | Gaming |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.















