Core i5-13400F vs Core Ultra 7 265H

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.

Core i5-13400F vs Core Ultra 7 265H FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core i5-13400F vs Core Ultra 7 265H: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core i5-13400F

2023

Why buy it

✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core Ultra 7 265H.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 7 265H across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (25,029 vs 34,702).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 24 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $196 MSRP, while Core Ultra 7 265H mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌150% higher power demand at 65W vs 26W.

Core Ultra 7 265H

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +32.7% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+20% larger total L3 cache (24 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Draws 26W instead of 65W, a 39W reduction.
✅40% more PCIe lanes (28 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc 140T GPU, while Core i5-13400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 7 265H better than Core i5-13400F?

Yes. Core Ultra 7 265H is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 32.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 38.6% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core Ultra 7 265H is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 32.7% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core Ultra 7 265H is the stronger fit. You are getting 38.6% better PassMark, backed by 16 cores and 16 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 20% larger total L3 cache (24 MB vs 20 MB).

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

Core Ultra 7 265H is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-13400F is easier to justify if budget matters more than peak performance. Core Ultra 7 265H comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $196 MSRP, and it still gives you a 32.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-13400F is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), which is why it can still make sense for tighter-budget builds on paper.

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

Core Ultra 7 265H makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2023), 20% larger total L3 cache (24 MB vs 20 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 16 cores / 16 threads instead of 10/16. That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

Core i5-13400F vs Core Ultra 7 265H Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

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 Ultra 7 265H

The Core Ultra 7 265H is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Arrow Lake-H (2025) architecture. It features 16 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 4.5 GHz, with boost up to 5.3 GHz. L3 cache: 24 MB. Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2049. Thermal design power (TDP): 26 MB + 24 MB. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 34,702 points. Launch price was $471.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 265H offers 16 cores / 16 threads — the Core Ultra 7 265H has 6 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 5.3 GHz on the Core Ultra 7 265H — a 14.1% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 7 265H (base: 2.5 GHz vs 4.5 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Core Ultra 7 265H uses Arrow Lake-H (2025) (5 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Core Ultra 7 265H's 34,702 — a 32.4% lead for the Core Ultra 7 265H. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 24 MB on the Core Ultra 7 265H.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Core Ultra 7 265H
Cores / Threads	10 / 16	16 / 16+60%
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz	5.3 GHz+15%
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	4.5 GHz+80%
L3 Cache	20 MB (total)	24 MB+20%
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)	—
Process	Intel 7 nm	5 nm-29%
Architecture	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)	Arrow Lake-H (2025)
PassMark	25,029	34,702+39%
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 Ultra 7 265H uses FCBGA2049 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-13400F versus 8400 on the Core Ultra 7 265H — the Core Ultra 7 265H supports 75% 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 — 50% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 28 (Core Ultra 7 265H) — the Core Ultra 7 265H offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-13400F) and BGA 2049 (Core Ultra 7 265H).

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Core Ultra 7 265H
Socket	LGA1700	FCBGA2049
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200	8400+75%
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB+50%	128 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	20	28+40%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the Core Ultra 7 265H supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. The Core Ultra 7 265H includes integrated graphics (Intel Arc 140T GPU), 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; Core Ultra 7 265H rivals Ryzen AI 9 HX 370.