
Atom E680

Core i5-13400F
Atom E680 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.
Atom E680 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
Atom E680 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.
Atom E680
2010Why buy it
- β Draws 4W instead of 65W, a 61W reduction.
- β Integrated graphics onboard with Intel GMA 600, while Core i5-13400F needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- βWorse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- βLower PassMark (325 vs 25,029).
- βOlder platform position on BGA676, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- βNo boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Core i5-13400F
2023Why buy it
- β Better for gaming: +2471.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- β Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of BGA676 and older memory support.
- β 400% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 4) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- β Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Atom E680.
Trade-offs
- βLaunch MSRP is still $196 MSRP, while Atom E680 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- β1525% higher power demand at 65W vs 4W.
- βNo integrated graphics, while Atom E680 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i5-13400F better than Atom E680?
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?
Atom E680 vs Core i5-13400F Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Atom E680
The Atom E680 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 14 September 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Tunnel Creek (2010) architecture. It features 1 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: BGA676. Thermal design power (TDP): 4 Watt. Memory support: DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 325 points. Launch price was $69.

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 (2023β2024) 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 Atom E680 packs 1 cores / 2 threads, while the Core i5-13400F offers 10 cores / 16 threads β the Core i5-13400F has 9 more cores. Boost clocks reach 1.6 GHz on the Atom E680 versus 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F β a 96.8% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F. The Atom E680 uses the Tunnel Creek (2010) architecture (45 nm), while the Core i5-13400F uses Raptor Lake-S (2023β2024) (Intel 7 nm). In PassMark, the Atom E680 scores 325 against the Core i5-13400F's 25,029 β a 194.9% lead for the Core i5-13400F. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Atom E680 vs 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F.
| Feature | Atom E680 | Core i5-13400F |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 2 | 10 / 16+900% |
| Boost Clock | 1.6 GHz | 4.6 GHz+187% |
| Base Clock | β | 2.5 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 20 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB (per core) | 1.25 MB (per core)+150% |
| Process | 45 nm | Intel 7 nm-84% |
| Architecture | Tunnel Creek (2010) | Raptor Lake-S (2023β2024) |
| PassMark | 325 | 25,029+7601% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | β | 16,211 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | β | 2,407 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | β | 11,408 |
Memory & Platform
The Atom E680 uses the BGA676 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core i5-13400F uses LGA1700 (PCIe 5.0) β making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-800 on the Atom E680 versus DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-13400F β the Core i5-13400F supports 500% 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 2 GB β 9500% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (Atom E680) vs 2 (Core i5-13400F). PCIe lanes: 4 (Atom E680) vs 20 (Core i5-13400F) β the Core i5-13400F offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel FCBGA518 (Atom E680) and H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-13400F).
| Feature | Atom E680 | Core i5-13400F |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | BGA676 | LGA1700 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 5.0+150% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-800 | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200+500% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 2 GB | 192 GB+9500% |
| RAM Channels | 1 | 2+100% |
| ECC Support | No | No |
| PCIe Lanes | 4 | 20+400% |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Atom E680) / VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F). The Atom E680 includes integrated graphics (Intel GMA 600), while the Core i5-13400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.
| Feature | Atom E680 | Core i5-13400F |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | Intel GMA 600 | β |
| Unlocked | β | No |
| AVX-512 | β | No |
| Virtualization | β | VT-x, VT-d |
| Target Use | β | Gaming |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













