
Core i5-10400F
Popular choices:

Core i9-13900TE
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 $394 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $554 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 119.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 37.2 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $554 MSRP).
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i9-13900TE.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-13900TE across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 20,602).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 36 MB).
- ❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core i9-13900TE moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
Core i9-13900TE
2023Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +44.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+200% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
- ✅25% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 37.2 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($554 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Core i5-10400F
2020Core i9-13900TE
2023Why buy it
- ✅Costs $394 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $554 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 119.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 37.2 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $554 MSRP).
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i9-13900TE.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +44.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+200% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
- ✅25% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-13900TE across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 20,602).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 36 MB).
- ❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core i9-13900TE moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 37.2 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($554 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i9-13900TE 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 i9-13900TE |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 192 FPS | 306 FPS |
| medium | 152 FPS | 288 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 235 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 |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Core i9-13900TE |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 415 FPS |
| medium | 318 FPS | 363 FPS |
| high | 290 FPS | 296 FPS |
| ultra | 253 FPS | 259 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 352 FPS |
| medium | 292 FPS | 316 FPS |
| high | 267 FPS | 263 FPS |
| ultra | 234 FPS | 212 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 309 FPS | 198 FPS |
| medium | 258 FPS | 180 FPS |
| high | 235 FPS | 171 FPS |
| ultra | 199 FPS | 146 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Core i9-13900TE |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 515 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 515 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 515 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 483 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 515 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 515 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 498 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 427 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 510 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 429 FPS |
| high | 289 FPS | 380 FPS |
| ultra | 229 FPS | 321 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | Core i9-13900TE |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 515 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 515 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 515 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 515 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 515 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 515 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 515 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 515 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 515 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 515 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 498 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 437 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Core i9-13900TE

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 i9-13900TE
Core i9-13900TE
The Core i9-13900TE 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 GHz, with boost up to 5 GHz. L3 cache: 36 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR4, DDR5 Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 20,602 points. Launch price was $299.
Processing Power
The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core i9-13900TE offers 24 cores / 32 threads — the Core i9-13900TE has 18 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5 GHz on the Core i9-13900TE — a 15.1% clock advantage for the Core i9-13900TE (base: 2.9 GHz vs 1 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i9-13900TE uses Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) (10 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Core i9-13900TE's 20,602 — a 45% lead for the Core i9-13900TE. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 36 MB (total) on the Core i9-13900TE.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core i9-13900TE |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 24 / 32+300% |
| Boost Clock | 4.3 GHz | 5 GHz+16% |
| Base Clock | 2.9 GHz+190% | 1 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 | 20,602+58% |
| 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 i9-13900TE 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 i9-13900TE — the Core i9-13900TE 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 i9-13900TE) — the Core i9-13900TE offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and LGA1700 (Core i9-13900TE).
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core i9-13900TE |
|---|---|---|
| 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. Only the Core i9-13900TE supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. The Core i9-13900TE includes integrated graphics (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.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core i9-13900TE |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | UHD Graphics 770 |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| 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 i9-13900TE 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 37.2 pts/$ for the Core i9-13900TE — making the Core i5-10400F the 74.6% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | Core i9-13900TE |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $160-71% | $554 |
| Performance per Dollar | 81.4+119% | 37.2 |
| Release Date | 2020 | 2023 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












