
Core i5-13400F
Popular choices:

Core i7-7820EQ
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 i5-13400F
2023Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +74.4% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+150% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 8 MB).
- ✅Costs $182 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $378 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 546.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 19.8 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $378 MSRP).
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌44.4% higher power demand at 65W vs 45W.
Core i7-7820EQ
2017Why buy it
- ✅Draws 45W instead of 65W, a 20W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (7,470 vs 25,029).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 20 MB).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 19.8 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($378 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Core i5-13400F
2023Core i7-7820EQ
2017Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +74.4% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+150% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 8 MB).
- ✅Costs $182 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $378 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 546.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 19.8 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $378 MSRP).
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Why buy it
- ✅Draws 45W instead of 65W, a 20W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌44.4% higher power demand at 65W vs 45W.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (7,470 vs 25,029).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 20 MB).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 19.8 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($378 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i5-13400F better than Core i7-7820EQ?
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 i5-13400F | Core i7-7820EQ |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 171 FPS | 166 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 130 FPS |
| high | 132 FPS | 103 FPS |
| ultra | 112 FPS | 81 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 143 FPS | 139 FPS |
| medium | 123 FPS | 108 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 84 FPS |
| ultra | 84 FPS | 66 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 81 FPS | 66 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 55 FPS |
| high | 59 FPS | 43 FPS |
| ultra | 46 FPS | 34 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Core i7-7820EQ |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 545 FPS | 176 FPS |
| medium | 464 FPS | 151 FPS |
| high | 389 FPS | 140 FPS |
| ultra | 356 FPS | 106 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 458 FPS | 153 FPS |
| medium | 403 FPS | 131 FPS |
| high | 345 FPS | 122 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 95 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 280 FPS | 120 FPS |
| medium | 247 FPS | 106 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 83 FPS |
| ultra | 204 FPS | 61 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Core i7-7820EQ |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 187 FPS |
| medium | 449 FPS | 187 FPS |
| high | 415 FPS | 187 FPS |
| ultra | 375 FPS | 187 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 490 FPS | 187 FPS |
| medium | 422 FPS | 187 FPS |
| high | 382 FPS | 187 FPS |
| ultra | 343 FPS | 187 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 393 FPS | 187 FPS |
| medium | 331 FPS | 187 FPS |
| high | 296 FPS | 187 FPS |
| ultra | 246 FPS | 180 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Core i7-7820EQ |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 187 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 187 FPS |
| high | 626 FPS | 187 FPS |
| ultra | 626 FPS | 187 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 187 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 187 FPS |
| high | 598 FPS | 187 FPS |
| ultra | 521 FPS | 187 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 535 FPS | 187 FPS |
| medium | 492 FPS | 187 FPS |
| high | 439 FPS | 187 FPS |
| ultra | 382 FPS | 187 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and Core i7-7820EQ

Core i5-13400F
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 i7-7820EQ
Core i7-7820EQ
The Core i7-7820EQ is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 January 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Kaby Lake (2016−2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Max frequency: 3.1 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3L-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 7,470 points. Launch price was $378.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Core i7-7820EQ offers 4 cores / 8 threads — the Core i5-13400F has 6 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 3.1 GHz on the Core i7-7820EQ — a 39% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F. The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Core i7-7820EQ uses Kaby Lake (2016−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Core i7-7820EQ's 7,470 — a 108.1% lead for the Core i5-13400F. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 8 MB on the Core i7-7820EQ.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Core i7-7820EQ |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 10 / 16+150% | 4 / 8 |
| Boost Clock | 4.6 GHz+48% | 3.1 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 20 MB (total)+150% | 8 MB |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core)+25% | 1 MB |
| Process | Intel 7 nm-50% | 14 nm |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) | Kaby Lake (2016−2019) |
| PassMark | 25,029+235% | 7,470 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 16,211 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 2,407 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 11,408 | — |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F) / not specified (Core i7-7820EQ). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Core i7-7820EQ |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | — |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | — |
| Target Use | Gaming | — |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the Core i7-7820EQ debuted at $378. On MSRP ($196 vs $378), the Core i5-13400F is $182 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 19.8 pts/$ for the Core i7-7820EQ — making the Core i5-13400F the 146.4% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Core i7-7820EQ |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $196-48% | $378 |
| Performance per Dollar | 127.7+545% | 19.8 |
| Release Date | 2023 | 2017 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













