Chipversus Index
Jump to Section

Athlon 64 FX-60 vs Core i5-13400F

CPUCPUGPUGPU
AMD

Athlon 64 FX-60

2 Cores2 Thrd110 WWMax: 2.6 GHz2006
Similar parts
·······
Buy on Amazon
VS
Intel

Core i5-13400F

10 Cores16 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.6 GHz2023
Buy on Amazon

Athlon 64 FX-60 vs Core i5-13400F Performance Spectrum

Athlon 64 FX-60
2 / 2
1,205
0.0%
brand logoAthlon 64 3800+
brand logoAthlon 64 X2 TK-42
brand logoAthlon II X2 250u
brand logoAthlon II X2 240
brand logoRyzen 5 PRO 5650G
brand logoRyzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX
brand logoRyzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX
brand logoRyzen Threadripper 3990X
Core i5-13400F
10 / 16
25,029
+1977.1%
brand logoCore i3-12100F
brand logoCore i5-11400
brand logoCore i5-11600K
brand logoCore i9-11980HK
brand logoCore i9-13900HX
brand logoCore i9-14900KF
brand logoXeon w9-3575X
brand logoXeon w9-3595X

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.

Athlon 64 FX-60 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

Path of Exile 2

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-60
low30 FPS
medium30 FPS
high30 FPS
ultra30 FPS
1080P
Core i5-13400F
low171 FPS
medium158 FPS
high132 FPS
ultra112 FPS
Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-60
low30 FPS
medium30 FPS
high30 FPS
ultra30 FPS
1080P
Core i5-13400F
low545 FPS
medium464 FPS
high389 FPS
ultra356 FPS
League of Legends

League of Legends

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-60
low30 FPS
medium30 FPS
high30 FPS
ultra30 FPS
1080P
Core i5-13400F
low530 FPS
medium449 FPS
high415 FPS
ultra375 FPS
Valorant

Valorant

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-60
low30 FPS
medium30 FPS
high30 FPS
ultra30 FPS
1080P
Core i5-13400F
low626 FPS
medium626 FPS
high626 FPS
ultra626 FPS
Among Us

Among Us

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-60
low30 FPS
medium30 FPS
high30 FPS
ultra30 FPS
1080P
Core i5-13400F
low60 FPS
medium60 FPS
high60 FPS
ultra60 FPS
Apex Legends

Apex Legends

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-60
low30 FPS
medium30 FPS
high30 FPS
ultra30 FPS
1080P
Core i5-13400F
low300 FPS
medium300 FPS
high296 FPS
ultra287 FPS
ARC Raiders

ARC Raiders

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-60
low30 FPS
medium30 FPS
high30 FPS
ultra30 FPS
1080P
Core i5-13400F
low288 FPS
medium215 FPS
high188 FPS
ultra169 FPS
Baldur's Gate 3

Baldur's Gate 3

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-60
low30 FPS
medium30 FPS
high30 FPS
ultra30 FPS
1080P
Core i5-13400F
low269 FPS
medium242 FPS
high200 FPS
ultra174 FPS
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6

Call of Duty: Black Ops 6

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-60
low30 FPS
medium30 FPS
high30 FPS
ultra30 FPS
1080P
Core i5-13400F
low274 FPS
medium234 FPS
high207 FPS
ultra179 FPS
Call of Duty: Warzone

Call of Duty: Warzone

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-60
low30 FPS
medium30 FPS
high30 FPS
ultra30 FPS
1080P
Core i5-13400F
low234 FPS
medium214 FPS
high178 FPS
ultra166 FPS
Check FPS with Custom Builds

Athlon 64 FX-60 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.

Athlon 64 FX-60

2006

Why buy it

    Trade-offs

    • ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
    • ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (480 vs 11,408).
    • ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 1.2 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($1,031 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
    • ❌69.2% higher power demand at 110W vs 65W.
    • ❌Older platform position on 939, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.

    Core i5-13400F

    2023

    Why buy it

    • ✅Better for gaming: +598.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
    • ✅Costs $835 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $1,031 MSRP).
    • ✅Delivers 10825.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 1.2 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $1,031 MSRP).
    • ✅Draws 65W instead of 110W, a 45W reduction.
    • ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of 939 and older memory support.

    Trade-offs

    • ❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

    Quick Answers

    So, is Core i5-13400F better than Athlon 64 FX-60?
    Yes. Core i5-13400F is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 598.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 2276.7% better Geekbench multi-core, 1977.1% higher PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.
    Which one is better for gaming?
    If gaming is the priority, Core i5-13400F is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 598.2% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.
    Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
    For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i5-13400F is the stronger fit. You are getting 2276.7% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 10 cores and 16 threads.
    Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
    Core i5-13400F is the better buy right now. Core i5-13400F comes in $835 cheaper on MSRP at $196 MSRP versus $1,031 MSRP, and it still gives you a 598.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 10825.9% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 1.2 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.
    Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
    Core i5-13400F makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2023 vs 2006), a healthier platform with LGA1700 and DDR5 instead of 939, and more multi-core headroom with 10 cores / 16 threads instead of 2/2. That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

    Athlon 64 FX-60 vs Core i5-13400F Technical Specifications

    Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

    AMD

    Athlon 64 FX-60

    The Athlon 64 FX-60 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Toledo (2006) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: 939. Thermal design power (TDP): 110 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,205 points. Launch price was $149.

    Intel

    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 Athlon 64 FX-60 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Core i5-13400F offers 10 cores / 16 threads — the Core i5-13400F has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the Athlon 64 FX-60 versus 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F — a 55.6% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F. The Athlon 64 FX-60 uses the Toledo (2006) architecture (90 nm), while the Core i5-13400F uses Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) (Intel 7 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 FX-60 scores 1,205 against the Core i5-13400F's 25,029 — a 181.6% lead for the Core i5-13400F. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 250 vs 2,407, a 162.4% lead for the Core i5-13400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 480 vs 11,408 (183.8% advantage for the Core i5-13400F). L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon 64 FX-60 vs 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F.

    FeatureAthlon 64 FX-60Core i5-13400F
    Cores / Threads
    2 / 2
    10 / 16+400%
    Boost Clock
    2.6 GHz
    4.6 GHz+77%
    Base Clock
    —
    2.5 GHz
    L3 Cache
    0 kB
    20 MB (total)
    L2 Cache
    2 MB+60%
    1.25 MB (per core)
    Process
    90 nm
    Intel 7 nm-92%
    Architecture
    Toledo (2006)
    Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)
    PassMark
    1,205
    25,029+1977%
    Cinebench R23 Multi
    —
    16,211
    Geekbench 6 Single
    250
    2,407+863%
    Geekbench 6 Multi
    480
    11,408+2277%
    🧠

    Memory & Platform

    The Athlon 64 FX-60 uses the 939 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Core i5-13400F uses LGA1700 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR-400 on the Athlon 64 FX-60 versus DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-13400F — the Core i5-13400F supports -1300% 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 4 GB — 4700% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon 64 FX-60) vs 20 (Core i5-13400F) — the Core i5-13400F offers 20 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: nForce4,K8T890 (Athlon 64 FX-60) and H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-13400F).

    FeatureAthlon 64 FX-60Core i5-13400F
    Socket
    939
    LGA1700
    PCIe Generation
    PCIe 1.1
    PCIe 5.0+355%
    Max RAM Speed
    DDR-400
    DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200
    Max RAM Capacity
    4 GB
    192 GB+4700%
    RAM Channels
    2
    2
    ECC Support
    No
    No
    PCIe Lanes
    0
    20
    🔧

    Advanced Features

    Only the Athlon 64 FX-60 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: None (Athlon 64 FX-60) vs VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F). Primary use case: Athlon 64 FX-60 targets Gaming/Enthusiast, Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.

    FeatureAthlon 64 FX-60Core i5-13400F
    Integrated GPU
    No
    No
    Unlocked
    Yes
    No
    AVX-512
    No
    No
    Virtualization
    None
    VT-x, VT-d
    Target Use
    Gaming/Enthusiast
    Gaming
    💰

    Value Analysis

    At launch, the Athlon 64 FX-60 was priced at $1031, while the Core i5-13400F came in at $196. On launch pricing ($1031 vs $196), Core i5-13400F was $835 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon 64 FX-60 delivers 1.2 pts/$ vs 127.7 pts/$ for the Core i5-13400F — making the Core i5-13400F the 196.4% better value option.

    FeatureAthlon 64 FX-60Core i5-13400F
    MSRP
    $1031
    $196-81%
    Performance per Dollar
    1.2
    127.7+10542%
    Release Date
    2006
    2023
    Search Athlon 64 FX-60 on AmazonSearch Core i5-13400F on Amazon

    Affiliate Disclosure

    ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

    Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.