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.

Core i5-13400F vs Core i7-13700T 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.

Core i5-13400F vs Core i7-13700T: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core i5-13400F

2023

Why buy it

✅+39.6% higher Cinebench R23 multi-core.
✅Costs $188 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $384 MSRP).
✅Delivers 75.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 72.6 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $384 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i7-13700T.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-13700T across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 30 MB).
❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-13700T can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i7-13700T

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +10.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+50% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD 770, while Core i5-13400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (11,611 vs 16,211).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 72.6 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($384 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-13700T better than Core i5-13400F?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core i7-13700T is ahead with a 10.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i5-13400F pulls ahead with 39.6% better Cinebench R23 multi-core. Core i7-13700T also has the bigger cache pool with 50% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 20 MB).

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 39.6% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 10 cores and 16 threads.

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

Core i7-13700T is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-13400F is easier to justify if budget matters more than peak performance. Core i7-13700T comes in 95.9% more expensive on MSRP at $384 MSRP versus $196 MSRP, and it still gives you a 10.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Core i5-13400F is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 39.6% better Cinebench R23 multi-core. Core i5-13400F is also 75.8% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 72.6 PassMark/$), which is why it can still make sense for tighter-budget builds on paper.

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

Core i7-13700T is the safer long-term CPU choice because it gives you more room to grow and a better platform outlook.

Core i5-13400F vs Core i7-13700T Technical Specifications

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

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.

Core i7-13700T

The Core i7-13700T 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 16 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 1.4 GHz, with boost up to 4.9 GHz. L3 cache: 30 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-5600, DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 27,890 points. Launch price was $384.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Core i7-13700T offers 16 cores / 24 threads — the Core i7-13700T has 6 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 4.9 GHz on the Core i7-13700T — a 6.3% clock advantage for the Core i7-13700T (base: 2.5 GHz vs 1.4 GHz). Both are built on the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture using a Intel 7 nm process. In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Core i7-13700T's 27,890 — a 10.8% lead for the Core i7-13700T. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 16,211 vs 11,611 (33.1% advantage for the Core i5-13400F). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,407 vs 2,537, a 5.3% lead for the Core i7-13700T that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 11,408 vs 15,020 (27.3% advantage for the Core i7-13700T). L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 30 MB (total) on the Core i7-13700T.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Core i7-13700T
Cores / Threads	10 / 16	16 / 24+60%
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz	4.9 GHz+7%
Base Clock	2.5 GHz+79%	1.4 GHz
L3 Cache	20 MB (total)	30 MB (total)+50%
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)	2 MB (per core)+60%
Process	Intel 7 nm	Intel 7 nm
Architecture	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)
PassMark	25,029	27,890+11%
Cinebench R23 Multi	16,211+40%	11,611
Geekbench 6 Single	2,407	2,537+5%
Geekbench 6 Multi	11,408	15,020+32%

🧠

Memory & Platform

Both processors use the LGA1700 socket with PCIe 5.0. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-13400F versus DDR5-5600 on the Core i7-13700T — the Core i7-13700T supports 16.7% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 192 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 20 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-13400F) and Z790,B760,H770,H710 (Core i7-13700T).

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Core i7-13700T
Socket	LGA1700	LGA1700
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200	DDR5-5600+17%
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB	192 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	20

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. The Core i7-13700T includes integrated graphics (UHD 770), while the Core i5-13400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming, Core i7-13700T targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600; Core i7-13700T rivals Ryzen 7 7700.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Core i7-13700T
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	UHD 770
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	Gaming	Gaming

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core i5-13400F was priced at $196, while the Core i7-13700T came in at $384. On launch pricing ($196 vs $384), Core i5-13400F was $188 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 72.6 pts/$ for the Core i7-13700T — making the Core i5-13400F the 55% better value option.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Core i7-13700T
MSRP	$196-49%	$384
Performance per Dollar	127.7+76%	72.6
Release Date	2023	2023

Search Core i5-13400F on Amazon

Search Core i7-13700T 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.