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

2020

Why buy it

✅Costs $394 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $554 MSRP).
✅Delivers 11.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 73.1 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $554 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i9-13900E.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-13900E across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (5,783 vs 15,000).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 36 MB).
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core i9-13900E moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i9-13900E can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i9-13900E

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +109.4% 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

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 73.1 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($554 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Core i9-13900E

2023

Why buy it

✅Costs $394 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $554 MSRP).
✅Delivers 11.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 73.1 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $554 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i9-13900E.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +109.4% 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 i9-13900E across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (5,783 vs 15,000).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 36 MB).
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core i9-13900E moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i9-13900E can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 73.1 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($554 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i9-13900E better than Core i5-10400F?

Yes. Core i9-13900E is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 109.4% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data, 159.4% better Geekbench multi-core, 210.7% higher PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i9-13900E is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 109.4% more average FPS across 4 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i9-13900E is the better fit. You are getting 159.4% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 24 cores and 32 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 200% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 12 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core i9-13900E is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-10400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Core i9-13900E is 246.3% more expensive on MSRP at $554 MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you a 109.4% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-10400F is also 11.5% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 73.1 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper. That said, if you already own a compatible LGA1200 + DDR4 setup, Core i5-10400F can still make sense as a platform-matched option because it avoids a motherboard and RAM swap.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core i9-13900E is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2023 vs 2020), a healthier platform with LGA1700 and DDR5 instead of LGA1200, 200% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 12 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 24 cores / 32 threads instead of 6/12. That should give you a better long-term upgrade path for motherboard, RAM, and future CPU swaps.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

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.

Core i5-10400F Benchmark Check

Core i9-13900E Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-13900E
1080p
low	192 FPS	305 FPS
medium	152 FPS	288 FPS
high	123 FPS	234 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	199 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	268 FPS
medium	119 FPS	229 FPS
high	97 FPS	174 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	154 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	184 FPS
medium	70 FPS	157 FPS
high	55 FPS	118 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	106 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i9-13900E

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-13900E
1080p
low	326 FPS	412 FPS
medium	318 FPS	360 FPS
high	290 FPS	293 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	257 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	350 FPS
medium	292 FPS	314 FPS
high	267 FPS	261 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	210 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	197 FPS
medium	258 FPS	179 FPS
high	235 FPS	170 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	146 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i9-13900E

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-13900E
1080p
low	326 FPS	1012 FPS
medium	326 FPS	1012 FPS
high	326 FPS	977 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	838 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	991 FPS
medium	326 FPS	881 FPS
high	326 FPS	793 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	656 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	599 FPS
medium	326 FPS	519 FPS
high	289 FPS	463 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	396 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i9-13900E

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-13900E
1080p
low	326 FPS	1012 FPS
medium	326 FPS	1012 FPS
high	326 FPS	935 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	810 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	1010 FPS
medium	326 FPS	881 FPS
high	326 FPS	761 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	651 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	756 FPS
medium	326 FPS	662 FPS
high	326 FPS	578 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	437 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i9-13900E

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Core i9-13900E

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 i9-13900E

The Core i9-13900E 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 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 5.2 GHz. L3 cache: 36 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4, DDR5 Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 40,476 points. Launch price was $499.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core i9-13900E offers 24 cores / 32 threads — the Core i9-13900E has 18 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5.2 GHz on the Core i9-13900E — a 18.9% clock advantage for the Core i9-13900E (base: 2.9 GHz vs 1.8 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i9-13900E uses Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) (10 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Core i9-13900E's 40,476 — a 102.6% lead for the Core i9-13900E. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 2,606, a 56.7% lead for the Core i9-13900E that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 5,783 vs 15,000 (88.7% advantage for the Core i9-13900E). L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 36 MB (total) on the Core i9-13900E.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-13900E
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	24 / 32+300%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz	5.2 GHz+21%
Base Clock	2.9 GHz+61%	1.8 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	36 MB (total)+200%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	2 MB (per core)+700%
Process	14 nm	10 nm-29%
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)
PassMark	13,029	40,476+211%
Cinebench R23 Multi	8,191	—
Geekbench 6 Single	1,454	2,606+79%
Geekbench 6 Multi	5,783	15,000+159%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i9-13900E uses LGA1700 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus DDR5-5600 on the Core i9-13900E — the Core i9-13900E supports 22.2% 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 i9-13900E) — the Core i9-13900E offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and W680,Q670,Z790,H770 (Core i9-13900E).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-13900E
Socket	LGA1200	LGA1700
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 5.0+67%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	DDR5-5600+25%
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	128 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	20+25%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. The Core i9-13900E includes integrated graphics (Intel UHD Graphics 770), while the Core i5-10400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, Core i9-13900E targets Embedded. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-13900E
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	Intel UHD Graphics 770
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	Gaming	Embedded

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Core i9-13900E debuted at $554. On MSRP ($160 vs $554), the Core i5-10400F is $394 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 73.1 pts/$ for the Core i9-13900E — making the Core i5-10400F the 10.8% better value option.