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

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +39.1% higher average FPS across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $113 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $309 MSRP).
✅Delivers 178.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 45.8 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $309 MSRP).
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.

Core i9-10900TE

2020

Why buy it

✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (14,159 vs 25,029).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 45.8 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($309 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Core i5-13400F

2023

Core i9-10900TE

2020

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +39.1% higher average FPS across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $113 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $309 MSRP).
✅Delivers 178.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 45.8 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $309 MSRP).
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Why buy it

✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (14,159 vs 25,029).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 45.8 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($309 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-13400F better than Core i9-10900TE?

Yes. Core i5-13400F is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 39.1% average FPS lead across 8 shared CPU game tests in our data, 76.8% better 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 i5-13400F is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 39.1% more average FPS across 8 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i5-13400F is the better fit. You are getting 76.8% better PassMark, backed by 10 cores and 16 threads.

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

Core i5-13400F is the smarter buy today. Core i5-13400F is $113 cheaper on MSRP at $196 MSRP versus $309 MSRP, and it gives you a 39.1% average FPS lead across 8 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 178.7% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 45.8 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper. That said, if you already own a compatible LGA1200 + DDR4 setup, Core i9-10900TE can still make sense as a platform-matched option because it avoids a motherboard and RAM swap, but on MSRP alone you would want to find it meaningfully cheaper in real-world listings before that path becomes easy to justify.

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

Core i5-13400F 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, and more multi-core headroom with 10 cores / 16 threads instead of 10/20. 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 i5-13400F Benchmark Check

Core i9-10900TE Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Core i9-10900TE
1080p
low	171 FPS	163 FPS
medium	158 FPS	144 FPS
high	132 FPS	116 FPS
ultra	112 FPS	98 FPS
1440p
low	143 FPS	138 FPS
medium	123 FPS	118 FPS
high	99 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	84 FPS	81 FPS
4K
low	81 FPS	75 FPS
medium	74 FPS	69 FPS
high	59 FPS	55 FPS
ultra	46 FPS	43 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Core i9-10900TE

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Core i9-10900TE
1080p
low	545 FPS	267 FPS
medium	464 FPS	230 FPS
high	389 FPS	198 FPS
ultra	356 FPS	178 FPS
1440p
low	458 FPS	230 FPS
medium	403 FPS	203 FPS
high	345 FPS	176 FPS
ultra	301 FPS	153 FPS
4K
low	280 FPS	143 FPS
medium	247 FPS	126 FPS
high	231 FPS	119 FPS
ultra	204 FPS	104 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Core i9-10900TE

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Core i9-10900TE
1080p
low	530 FPS	354 FPS
medium	449 FPS	354 FPS
high	415 FPS	354 FPS
ultra	375 FPS	354 FPS
1440p
low	490 FPS	354 FPS
medium	422 FPS	354 FPS
high	382 FPS	354 FPS
ultra	343 FPS	354 FPS
4K
low	393 FPS	354 FPS
medium	331 FPS	345 FPS
high	296 FPS	310 FPS
ultra	246 FPS	254 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Core i9-10900TE

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Core i9-10900TE
1080p
low	626 FPS	354 FPS
medium	626 FPS	354 FPS
high	626 FPS	354 FPS
ultra	626 FPS	354 FPS
1440p
low	626 FPS	354 FPS
medium	626 FPS	354 FPS
high	598 FPS	354 FPS
ultra	521 FPS	354 FPS
4K
low	535 FPS	354 FPS
medium	492 FPS	354 FPS
high	439 FPS	354 FPS
ultra	382 FPS	354 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Core i9-10900TE

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and Core i9-10900TE

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 i9-10900TE

The Core i9-10900TE 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 10 cores and 20 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 4.5 GHz. L3 cache: 20 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1200. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 14,159 points. Launch price was $488.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, matching the Core i9-10900TE's 10 cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 4.5 GHz on the Core i9-10900TE — a 2.2% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 1.8 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Core i9-10900TE uses Comet Lake (2020−2025) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Core i9-10900TE's 14,159 — a 55.5% lead for the Core i5-13400F. Both processors carry 20 MB (total) of L3 cache.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Core i9-10900TE
Cores / Threads	10 / 16	10 / 20
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz+2%	4.5 GHz
Base Clock	2.5 GHz+39%	1.8 GHz
L3 Cache	20 MB (total)	20 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)+400%	256 kB (per core)
Process	Intel 7 nm-50%	14 nm
Architecture	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)	Comet Lake (2020−2025)
PassMark	25,029+77%	14,159
Cinebench R23 Multi	16,211	—
Geekbench 6 Single	2,407	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	11,408	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-13400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Core i9-10900TE uses LGA1200 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Core i9-10900TE
Socket	LGA1700	LGA1200
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+67%	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200	—
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	20	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F) / not specified (Core i9-10900TE). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Core i9-10900TE
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 i9-10900TE debuted at $309. On MSRP ($196 vs $309), the Core i5-13400F is $113 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 45.8 pts/$ for the Core i9-10900TE — making the Core i5-13400F the 94.4% better value option.