
Core i5-10400F
Popular choices:

Core i9-13900
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.
Core i5-10400F
2020Why buy it
- ✅Costs $389 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 125W, a 60W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i9-13900.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-13900 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 45,252).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 36 MB).
- ❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core i9-13900 moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i9-13900 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Core i9-13900
2023Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +68.5% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+200% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
- ✅25% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel UHD Graphics 770, while Core i5-10400F needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌243.1% HIGHER MSRP$549 MSRPvs$160 MSRP
- ❌92.3% higher power demand at 125W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Core i5-10400F
2020Core i9-13900
2023Why buy it
- ✅Costs $389 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 125W, a 60W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i9-13900.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +68.5% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+200% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
- ✅25% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel UHD Graphics 770, while Core i5-10400F needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-13900 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 45,252).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 36 MB).
- ❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core i9-13900 moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i9-13900 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌243.1% HIGHER MSRP$549 MSRPvs$160 MSRP
- ❌92.3% higher power demand at 125W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i9-13900 better than Core i5-10400F?
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?
Games Benchmarks
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Core i9-13900 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 192 FPS | 321 FPS |
| medium | 152 FPS | 311 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 247 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 209 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 278 FPS |
| medium | 119 FPS | 240 FPS |
| high | 97 FPS | 178 FPS |
| ultra | 79 FPS | 158 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 192 FPS |
| medium | 70 FPS | 164 FPS |
| high | 55 FPS | 123 FPS |
| ultra | 43 FPS | 112 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Core i9-13900 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 497 FPS |
| medium | 318 FPS | 434 FPS |
| high | 290 FPS | 354 FPS |
| ultra | 253 FPS | 313 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 422 FPS |
| medium | 292 FPS | 380 FPS |
| high | 267 FPS | 316 FPS |
| ultra | 234 FPS | 257 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 309 FPS | 236 FPS |
| medium | 258 FPS | 216 FPS |
| high | 235 FPS | 205 FPS |
| ultra | 199 FPS | 179 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Core i9-13900 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 762 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 626 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 543 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 467 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 680 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 567 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 485 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 423 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 497 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 430 FPS |
| high | 289 FPS | 383 FPS |
| ultra | 229 FPS | 329 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Core i9-13900 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 1012 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 905 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 792 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 704 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 840 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 739 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 646 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 568 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 620 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 555 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 491 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 430 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Core i9-13900

Core i5-10400F
Core i5-10400F
The Core i5-10400F is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 April 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 2.9 GHz, with boost up to 4.3 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1200. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 13,029 points. Launch price was $155.

Core i9-13900
Core i9-13900
The Core i9-13900 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 24 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 5.5 GHz. L3 cache: 36 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-5600, DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 45,252 points. Launch price was $549.
Processing Power
The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core i9-13900 offers 24 cores / 32 threads — the Core i9-13900 has 18 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5.5 GHz on the Core i9-13900 — a 24.5% clock advantage for the Core i9-13900 (base: 2.9 GHz vs 2 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i9-13900 uses Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) (Intel 7 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Core i9-13900's 45,252 — a 110.6% lead for the Core i9-13900. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 36 MB (total) on the Core i9-13900.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core i9-13900 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 24 / 32+300% |
| Boost Clock | 4.3 GHz | 5.5 GHz+28% |
| Base Clock | 2.9 GHz+45% | 2 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 12 MB (total) | 36 MB (total)+200% |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 2 MB (per core)+700% |
| Process | 14 nm | Intel 7 nm-50% |
| Architecture | Comet Lake (2020−2025) | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) |
| PassMark | 13,029 | 45,252+247% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 8,191 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,454 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 5,783 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i9-13900 uses LGA1700 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus 5600 on the Core i9-13900 — the Core i9-13900 supports 199.7% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 128 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 20 (Core i9-13900) — the Core i9-13900 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and Z790,B760 (Core i9-13900).
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core i9-13900 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1200 | LGA1700 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 5.0+67% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666 | 5600+139900% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB+104857500% | 128 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | No | No |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 20+25% |
Advanced Features
Only the Core i9-13900 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. The Core i9-13900 includes integrated graphics (Intel UHD Graphics 770), while the Core i5-10400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; Core i9-13900 rivals Ryzen 9 7900X.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core i9-13900 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Intel UHD Graphics 770 |
| Unlocked | No | Yes |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d |
| Target Use | Gaming | — |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Core i9-13900 debuted at $549. On MSRP ($160 vs $549), the Core i5-10400F is $389 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 82.4 pts/$ for the Core i9-13900 — making the Core i9-13900 the 1.2% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core i9-13900 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $160-71% | $549 |
| Performance per Dollar | 81.4 | 82.4+1% |
| Release Date | 2020 | 2023 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












