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

✅Costs $361 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $557 MSRP).
✅Delivers 134.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 54.4 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $557 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i9-14901E.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-14901E across 9 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (11,408 vs 14,262).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 36 MB).
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i9-14901E can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i9-14901E

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +26.5% higher average FPS across 9 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 54.4 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($557 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Core i5-13400F

2023

Core i9-14901E

2024

Why buy it

✅Costs $361 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $557 MSRP).
✅Delivers 134.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 54.4 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $557 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i9-14901E.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +26.5% higher average FPS across 9 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 i9-14901E across 9 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (11,408 vs 14,262).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 36 MB).
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i9-14901E can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 54.4 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($557 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i9-14901E better than Core i5-13400F?

Yes. Core i9-14901E is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 26.5% average FPS lead across 9 shared CPU game tests in our data, 25% better Geekbench multi-core, 21.1% higher 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 i9-14901E is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 26.5% more average FPS across 9 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i9-14901E is the better fit. You are getting 25% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 80% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 20 MB).

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

Core i9-14901E is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-13400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Core i9-14901E is 184.2% more expensive on MSRP at $557 MSRP versus $196 MSRP, and it gives you a 26.5% average FPS lead across 9 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-13400F is also 134.8% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 54.4 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

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

Core i9-14901E is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2023), 80% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 20 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 8 cores / 16 threads instead of 10/16. 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 i9-14901E Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Core i9-14901E
1080p
low	171 FPS	273 FPS
medium	158 FPS	254 FPS
high	132 FPS	212 FPS
ultra	112 FPS	184 FPS
1440p
low	143 FPS	256 FPS
medium	123 FPS	214 FPS
high	99 FPS	166 FPS
ultra	84 FPS	148 FPS
4K
low	81 FPS	175 FPS
medium	74 FPS	147 FPS
high	59 FPS	108 FPS
ultra	46 FPS	97 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Core i9-14901E

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Core i9-14901E
1080p
low	545 FPS	757 FPS
medium	464 FPS	677 FPS
high	389 FPS	549 FPS
ultra	356 FPS	479 FPS
1440p
low	458 FPS	659 FPS
medium	403 FPS	594 FPS
high	345 FPS	491 FPS
ultra	301 FPS	395 FPS
4K
low	280 FPS	369 FPS
medium	247 FPS	337 FPS
high	231 FPS	317 FPS
ultra	204 FPS	273 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Core i9-14901E

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Core i9-14901E
1080p
low	530 FPS	757 FPS
medium	449 FPS	653 FPS
high	415 FPS	570 FPS
ultra	375 FPS	481 FPS
1440p
low	490 FPS	720 FPS
medium	422 FPS	587 FPS
high	382 FPS	506 FPS
ultra	343 FPS	435 FPS
4K
low	393 FPS	508 FPS
medium	331 FPS	437 FPS
high	296 FPS	394 FPS
ultra	246 FPS	331 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Core i9-14901E

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Core i9-14901E
1080p
low	626 FPS	757 FPS
medium	626 FPS	757 FPS
high	626 FPS	757 FPS
ultra	626 FPS	729 FPS
1440p
low	626 FPS	757 FPS
medium	626 FPS	750 FPS
high	598 FPS	656 FPS
ultra	521 FPS	576 FPS
4K
low	535 FPS	629 FPS
medium	492 FPS	563 FPS
high	439 FPS	499 FPS
ultra	382 FPS	436 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Core i9-14901E

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and Core i9-14901E

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 i9-14901E

The Core i9-14901E is manufactured by Intel. It was released in Julho 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Raptor Lake-R (2023−2025) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 5.6 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. Passmark benchmark score: 30,298 points. Launch price was $499.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Core i9-14901E offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Core i5-13400F has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 5.6 GHz on the Core i9-14901E — a 19.6% clock advantage for the Core i9-14901E (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2.8 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Core i9-14901E uses Raptor Lake-R (2023−2025) (10 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Core i9-14901E's 30,298 — a 19% lead for the Core i9-14901E. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,407 vs 2,894, a 18.4% lead for the Core i9-14901E that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 11,408 vs 14,262 (22.2% advantage for the Core i9-14901E). L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 36 MB (total) on the Core i9-14901E.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Core i9-14901E
Cores / Threads	10 / 16+25%	8 / 16
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz	5.6 GHz+22%
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	2.8 GHz+12%
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-R (2023−2025)
PassMark	25,029	30,298+21%
Cinebench R23 Multi	16,211	—
Geekbench 6 Single	2,407	2,894+20%
Geekbench 6 Multi	11,408	14,262+25%

🧠

Memory & Platform

Both processors use the LGA1700 socket with PCIe 5.0. Both support up to DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 memory speed. 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 Intel 600 Series,Intel 700 Series (Core i9-14901E).

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Core i9-14901E
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	192 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	20

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F) vs Yes (Core i9-14901E). The Core i9-14901E includes integrated graphics (Intel 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 i9-14901E
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	Intel UHD Graphics 770
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	Yes
Target Use	Gaming	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the Core i9-14901E debuted at $557. On MSRP ($196 vs $557), the Core i5-13400F is $361 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 54.4 pts/$ for the Core i9-14901E — making the Core i5-13400F the 80.5% better value option.