
Core i5-13400F
Popular choices:

Core i9-13900E
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
- ✅Costs $358 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $554 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 74.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 73.1 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $554 MSRP).
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i9-13900E.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-13900E across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (11,408 vs 15,000).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 36 MB).
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i9-13900E can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Core i9-13900E
2023Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +43.2% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+80% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 20 MB).
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel UHD Graphics 770, while Core i5-13400F needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 73.1 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($554 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Core i5-13400F
2023Core i9-13900E
2023Why buy it
- ✅Costs $358 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $554 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 74.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 73.1 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $554 MSRP).
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i9-13900E.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +43.2% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+80% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 20 MB).
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel UHD Graphics 770, while Core i5-13400F needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-13900E across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (11,408 vs 15,000).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 36 MB).
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i9-13900E can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 73.1 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($554 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i9-13900E better than Core i5-13400F?
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 i9-13900E |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 171 FPS | 305 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 288 FPS |
| high | 132 FPS | 234 FPS |
| ultra | 112 FPS | 199 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 143 FPS | 268 FPS |
| medium | 123 FPS | 229 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 174 FPS |
| ultra | 84 FPS | 154 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 81 FPS | 184 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 157 FPS |
| high | 59 FPS | 118 FPS |
| ultra | 46 FPS | 106 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Core i9-13900E |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 545 FPS | 412 FPS |
| medium | 464 FPS | 360 FPS |
| high | 389 FPS | 293 FPS |
| ultra | 356 FPS | 257 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 458 FPS | 350 FPS |
| medium | 403 FPS | 314 FPS |
| high | 345 FPS | 261 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 210 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 280 FPS | 197 FPS |
| medium | 247 FPS | 179 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 170 FPS |
| ultra | 204 FPS | 146 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Core i9-13900E |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 1012 FPS |
| medium | 449 FPS | 1012 FPS |
| high | 415 FPS | 977 FPS |
| ultra | 375 FPS | 838 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 490 FPS | 991 FPS |
| medium | 422 FPS | 881 FPS |
| high | 382 FPS | 793 FPS |
| ultra | 343 FPS | 656 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 393 FPS | 599 FPS |
| medium | 331 FPS | 519 FPS |
| high | 296 FPS | 463 FPS |
| ultra | 246 FPS | 396 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Core i9-13900E |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 1012 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 1012 FPS |
| high | 626 FPS | 935 FPS |
| ultra | 626 FPS | 810 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 1010 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 881 FPS |
| high | 598 FPS | 761 FPS |
| ultra | 521 FPS | 651 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 535 FPS | 756 FPS |
| medium | 492 FPS | 662 FPS |
| high | 439 FPS | 578 FPS |
| ultra | 382 FPS | 437 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and Core i9-13900E

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 i9-13900E
Core i9-13900E
The Core i9-13900E 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 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 5.2 GHz. L3 cache: 36 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 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: 40,476 points. Launch price was $499.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Core i9-13900E offers 24 cores / 32 threads — the Core i9-13900E has 14 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 5.2 GHz on the Core i9-13900E — a 12.2% clock advantage for the Core i9-13900E (base: 2.5 GHz vs 1.8 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 i9-13900E's 40,476 — a 47.2% lead for the Core i9-13900E. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,407 vs 2,606, a 7.9% lead for the Core i9-13900E that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 11,408 vs 15,000 (27.2% advantage for the Core i9-13900E). L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 36 MB (total) on the Core i9-13900E.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Core i9-13900E |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 10 / 16 | 24 / 32+140% |
| Boost Clock | 4.6 GHz | 5.2 GHz+13% |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz+39% | 1.8 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 20 MB (total) | 36 MB (total)+80% |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core)+60% |
| Process | Intel 7 nm-30% | 10 nm |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) |
| PassMark | 25,029 | 40,476+62% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 16,211 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 2,407 | 2,606+8% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 11,408 | 15,000+31% |
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 W680,Q670,Z790,H770 (Core i9-13900E).
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Core i9-13900E |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | LGA1700 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0 | PCIe 5.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 | DDR5-5600 |
| 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. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. The Core i9-13900E includes integrated graphics (Intel UHD Graphics 770), while the Core i5-13400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming, Core i9-13900E targets Embedded. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Core i9-13900E |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Intel UHD Graphics 770 |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d |
| Target Use | Gaming | Embedded |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the Core i9-13900E debuted at $554. On MSRP ($196 vs $554), the Core i5-13400F is $358 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 73.1 pts/$ for the Core i9-13900E — making the Core i5-13400F the 54.4% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Core i9-13900E |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $196-65% | $554 |
| Performance per Dollar | 127.7+75% | 73.1 |
| Release Date | 2023 | 2023 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













