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

✅+20.8% higher Cinebench R23 multi-core.
✅Costs $304 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
✅Delivers 126.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 56.3 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i9-12900E.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-12900E across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 30 MB).
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i9-12900E can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i9-12900E

2022

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +35.5% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+50% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 770, while Core i5-13400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (13,420 vs 16,211).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 56.3 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($500 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Core i5-13400F

2023

Core i9-12900E

2022

Why buy it

✅+20.8% higher Cinebench R23 multi-core.
✅Costs $304 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
✅Delivers 126.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 56.3 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i9-12900E.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +35.5% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+50% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 770, while Core i5-13400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-12900E across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 30 MB).
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i9-12900E can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (13,420 vs 16,211).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 56.3 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($500 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-13400F better than Core i9-12900E?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, Core i9-12900E is ahead with a 35.5% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i5-13400F pulls ahead with 20.8% better Cinebench R23 multi-core. Core i9-12900E 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 better fit. You are getting 20.8% 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 i5-13400F is the smarter buy today. Core i5-13400F is $304 cheaper on MSRP at $196 MSRP versus $500 MSRP, and it gives you 20.8% better Cinebench R23 multi-core. The trade-off is that Core i9-12900E is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 35.5% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 126.7% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 56.3 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

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 2022) and more multi-core headroom with 10 cores / 16 threads instead of 16/24. That extra compute headroom should age better as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

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 i9-12900E Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Core i9-12900E
1080p
low	171 FPS	254 FPS
medium	158 FPS	239 FPS
high	132 FPS	201 FPS
ultra	112 FPS	172 FPS
1440p
low	143 FPS	220 FPS
medium	123 FPS	187 FPS
high	99 FPS	153 FPS
ultra	84 FPS	135 FPS
4K
low	81 FPS	151 FPS
medium	74 FPS	128 FPS
high	59 FPS	100 FPS
ultra	46 FPS	87 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Core i9-12900E

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Core i9-12900E
1080p
low	545 FPS	646 FPS
medium	464 FPS	552 FPS
high	389 FPS	462 FPS
ultra	356 FPS	410 FPS
1440p
low	458 FPS	557 FPS
medium	403 FPS	497 FPS
high	345 FPS	419 FPS
ultra	301 FPS	351 FPS
4K
low	280 FPS	330 FPS
medium	247 FPS	299 FPS
high	231 FPS	282 FPS
ultra	204 FPS	240 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Core i9-12900E

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Core i9-12900E
1080p
low	530 FPS	704 FPS
medium	449 FPS	704 FPS
high	415 FPS	704 FPS
ultra	375 FPS	704 FPS
1440p
low	490 FPS	704 FPS
medium	422 FPS	704 FPS
high	382 FPS	704 FPS
ultra	343 FPS	656 FPS
4K
low	393 FPS	596 FPS
medium	331 FPS	502 FPS
high	296 FPS	447 FPS
ultra	246 FPS	376 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Core i9-12900E

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Core i9-12900E
1080p
low	626 FPS	704 FPS
medium	626 FPS	704 FPS
high	626 FPS	704 FPS
ultra	626 FPS	704 FPS
1440p
low	626 FPS	704 FPS
medium	626 FPS	704 FPS
high	598 FPS	696 FPS
ultra	521 FPS	591 FPS
4K
low	535 FPS	659 FPS
medium	492 FPS	584 FPS
high	439 FPS	513 FPS
ultra	382 FPS	435 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Core i9-12900E

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and Core i9-12900E

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 i9-12900E

The Core i9-12900E is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 January 2022 (3 years ago). It is based on the Alder Lake-S (2022) architecture. It features 16 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 2.3 GHz, with boost up to 5 GHz. L3 cache: 30 MB (total). L2 cache: 1.25 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: 28,170 points. Launch price was $299.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Core i9-12900E offers 16 cores / 24 threads — the Core i9-12900E has 6 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 5 GHz on the Core i9-12900E — a 8.3% clock advantage for the Core i9-12900E (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2.3 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Core i9-12900E uses Alder Lake-S (2022) (10 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Core i9-12900E's 28,170 — a 11.8% lead for the Core i9-12900E. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 16,211 vs 13,420 (18.8% advantage for the Core i5-13400F). Multi-core Geekbench: 11,408 vs 13,107 (13.9% advantage for the Core i9-12900E). L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 30 MB (total) on the Core i9-12900E.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Core i9-12900E
Cores / Threads	10 / 16	16 / 24+60%
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz	5 GHz+9%
Base Clock	2.5 GHz+9%	2.3 GHz
L3 Cache	20 MB (total)	30 MB (total)+50%
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)	1.25 MB (per core)
Process	Intel 7 nm-30%	10 nm
Architecture	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)	Alder Lake-S (2022)
PassMark	25,029	28,170+13%
Cinebench R23 Multi	16,211+21%	13,420
Geekbench 6 Single	2,407	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	11,408	13,107+15%

🧠

Memory & Platform

Both processors use the LGA1700 socket with PCIe 5.0. Both support up to DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 memory speed. The Core i5-13400F supports up to 192 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 40% more capacity for professional workloads. 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 LGA1700 (Core i9-12900E).

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Core i9-12900E
Socket	LGA1700	LGA1700
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200	DDR5-4800
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB+50%	128 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	20

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the Core i9-12900E supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. The Core i9-12900E includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 770), while the Core i5-13400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Core i9-12900E
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 i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the Core i9-12900E debuted at $500. On MSRP ($196 vs $500), the Core i5-13400F is $304 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 56.3 pts/$ for the Core i9-12900E — making the Core i5-13400F the 77.5% better value option.