
Core i5-13400F
Popular choices:

Core i9-9900
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
- ✅+47% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
- ✅+25% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 16 MB).
- ✅Costs $227 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $423 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 232.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 38.4 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $423 MSRP).
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1151 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i9-9900 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Core i9-9900
2019Why buy it
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Core i5-13400F needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (1,637 vs 2,407).
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (7,619 vs 16,211).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (16 MB vs 20 MB).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 38.4 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($423 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌Older platform position on LGA1151 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
Core i5-13400F
2023Core i9-9900
2019Why buy it
- ✅+47% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
- ✅+25% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 16 MB).
- ✅Costs $227 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $423 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 232.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 38.4 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $423 MSRP).
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1151 and DDR4.
Why buy it
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Core i5-13400F needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i9-9900 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (1,637 vs 2,407).
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (7,619 vs 16,211).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (16 MB vs 20 MB).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 38.4 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($423 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌Older platform position on LGA1151 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i5-13400F better than Core i9-9900?
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 i9-9900 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 171 FPS | 292 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 259 FPS |
| high | 132 FPS | 219 FPS |
| ultra | 112 FPS | 188 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 143 FPS | 240 FPS |
| medium | 123 FPS | 191 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 157 FPS |
| ultra | 84 FPS | 138 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 81 FPS | 166 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 135 FPS |
| high | 59 FPS | 104 FPS |
| ultra | 46 FPS | 91 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Core i9-9900 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 545 FPS | 406 FPS |
| medium | 464 FPS | 406 FPS |
| high | 389 FPS | 406 FPS |
| ultra | 356 FPS | 403 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 458 FPS | 406 FPS |
| medium | 403 FPS | 406 FPS |
| high | 345 FPS | 406 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 360 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 280 FPS | 397 FPS |
| medium | 247 FPS | 337 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 318 FPS |
| ultra | 204 FPS | 273 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Core i9-9900 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 406 FPS |
| medium | 449 FPS | 406 FPS |
| high | 415 FPS | 406 FPS |
| ultra | 375 FPS | 406 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 490 FPS | 406 FPS |
| medium | 422 FPS | 406 FPS |
| high | 382 FPS | 406 FPS |
| ultra | 343 FPS | 406 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 393 FPS | 406 FPS |
| medium | 331 FPS | 406 FPS |
| high | 296 FPS | 397 FPS |
| ultra | 246 FPS | 331 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Core i9-9900 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 406 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 406 FPS |
| high | 626 FPS | 406 FPS |
| ultra | 626 FPS | 406 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 406 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 406 FPS |
| high | 598 FPS | 406 FPS |
| ultra | 521 FPS | 406 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 535 FPS | 406 FPS |
| medium | 492 FPS | 406 FPS |
| high | 439 FPS | 406 FPS |
| ultra | 382 FPS | 406 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and Core i9-9900

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 i9-9900
Core i9-9900
The Core i9-9900 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 23 April 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.1 GHz, with boost up to 5 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2666. Passmark benchmark score: 16,238 points. Launch price was $439.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Core i9-9900 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 GHz on the Core i9-9900 — a 8.3% clock advantage for the Core i9-9900 (base: 2.5 GHz vs 3.1 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Core i9-9900 uses Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Core i9-9900's 16,238 — a 42.6% lead for the Core i5-13400F. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 16,211 vs 7,619 (72.1% advantage for the Core i5-13400F). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,407 vs 1,637, a 38.1% lead for the Core i5-13400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 11,408 vs 7,619 (39.8% advantage for the Core i5-13400F). L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 16 MB (total) on the Core i9-9900.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Core i9-9900 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 10 / 16+25% | 8 / 16 |
| Boost Clock | 4.6 GHz | 5 GHz+9% |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz | 3.1 GHz+24% |
| L3 Cache | 20 MB (total)+25% | 16 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core)+400% | 256K (per core) |
| Process | Intel 7 nm-50% | 14 nm |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) | Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) |
| PassMark | 25,029+54% | 16,238 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 16,211+113% | 7,619 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 2,407+47% | 1,637 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 11,408+50% | 7,619 |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-13400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Core i9-9900 uses LGA1151 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-13400F versus DDR4-2666 on the Core i9-9900 — the Core i5-13400F supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. 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. PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 16 (Core i9-9900) — the Core i5-13400F offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-13400F) and Z390,B365 (Core i9-9900).
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Core i9-9900 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | LGA1151 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+67% | PCIe 3.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200+25% | DDR4-2666 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 192 GB+50% | 128 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | No | No |
| PCIe Lanes | 20+25% | 16 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. The Core i9-9900 includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), 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 i9-9900 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | UHD Graphics 630 |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| 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 i9-9900 debuted at $423. On MSRP ($196 vs $423), the Core i5-13400F is $227 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 38.4 pts/$ for the Core i9-9900 — making the Core i5-13400F the 107.5% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Core i9-9900 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $196-54% | $423 |
| Performance per Dollar | 127.7+233% | 38.4 |
| Release Date | 2023 | 2019 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













