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 $254 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $450 MSRP).
✅Delivers 17.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 108.8 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $450 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core Ultra 7 265HX.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 7 265HX across 10 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (11,408 vs 17,417).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 30 MB).
❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 7 265HX can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core Ultra 7 265HX

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +28.1% higher average FPS across 10 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+50% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Draws 55W instead of 65W, a 10W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU, while Core i5-13400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 108.8 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($450 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Core i5-13400F

2023

Core Ultra 7 265HX

2025

Why buy it

✅Costs $254 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $450 MSRP).
✅Delivers 17.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 108.8 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $450 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core Ultra 7 265HX.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +28.1% higher average FPS across 10 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+50% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Draws 55W instead of 65W, a 10W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU, while Core i5-13400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 7 265HX across 10 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (11,408 vs 17,417).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 30 MB).
❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 7 265HX can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 108.8 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($450 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Quick Answers

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

Yes. Core Ultra 7 265HX is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 28.1% average FPS lead across 10 shared CPU game tests in our data, 52.7% better Geekbench multi-core, 95.7% 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 Ultra 7 265HX is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 28.1% more average FPS across 10 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 265HX is the better fit. You are getting 52.7% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 20 cores and 20 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 50% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 20 MB).

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

Core Ultra 7 265HX is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-13400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Core Ultra 7 265HX is 129.6% more expensive on MSRP at $450 MSRP versus $196 MSRP, and it gives you a 28.1% average FPS lead across 10 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-13400F is also 17.3% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 108.8 PassMark/$), 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 Ultra 7 265HX is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2023), 50% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 20 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 20 cores / 20 threads instead of 10/16. That should give you a better long-term upgrade path for motherboard, RAM, and future CPU swaps.

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 Ultra 7 265HX Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Core Ultra 7 265HX
1080p
low	171 FPS	280 FPS
medium	158 FPS	273 FPS
high	132 FPS	228 FPS
ultra	112 FPS	192 FPS
1440p
low	143 FPS	226 FPS
medium	123 FPS	194 FPS
high	99 FPS	156 FPS
ultra	84 FPS	136 FPS
4K
low	81 FPS	151 FPS
medium	74 FPS	129 FPS
high	59 FPS	100 FPS
ultra	46 FPS	87 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Core Ultra 7 265HX

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Core Ultra 7 265HX
1080p
low	545 FPS	696 FPS
medium	464 FPS	595 FPS
high	389 FPS	499 FPS
ultra	356 FPS	450 FPS
1440p
low	458 FPS	607 FPS
medium	403 FPS	540 FPS
high	345 FPS	453 FPS
ultra	301 FPS	385 FPS
4K
low	280 FPS	357 FPS
medium	247 FPS	325 FPS
high	231 FPS	305 FPS
ultra	204 FPS	266 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Core Ultra 7 265HX

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Core Ultra 7 265HX
1080p
low	530 FPS	839 FPS
medium	449 FPS	685 FPS
high	415 FPS	610 FPS
ultra	375 FPS	522 FPS
1440p
low	490 FPS	727 FPS
medium	422 FPS	596 FPS
high	382 FPS	519 FPS
ultra	343 FPS	441 FPS
4K
low	393 FPS	515 FPS
medium	331 FPS	434 FPS
high	296 FPS	394 FPS
ultra	246 FPS	336 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Core Ultra 7 265HX

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Core Ultra 7 265HX
1080p
low	626 FPS	998 FPS
medium	626 FPS	903 FPS
high	626 FPS	784 FPS
ultra	626 FPS	712 FPS
1440p
low	626 FPS	817 FPS
medium	626 FPS	726 FPS
high	598 FPS	628 FPS
ultra	521 FPS	558 FPS
4K
low	535 FPS	557 FPS
medium	492 FPS	503 FPS
high	439 FPS	451 FPS
ultra	382 FPS	398 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Core Ultra 7 265HX

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and Core Ultra 7 265HX

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 265HX

The Core Ultra 7 265HX is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2025-01-01. It is based on the Arrow Lake-HX (2025) architecture. It features 20 cores and 20 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 5.3 GHz. L3 cache: 30 MB (total). L2 cache: 3 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2114. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 48,975 points. Launch price was $500.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 265HX offers 20 cores / 20 threads — the Core Ultra 7 265HX has 10 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 5.3 GHz on the Core Ultra 7 265HX — a 14.1% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 7 265HX (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2.6 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Core Ultra 7 265HX uses Arrow Lake-HX (2025) (3 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Core Ultra 7 265HX's 48,975 — a 64.7% lead for the Core Ultra 7 265HX. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,407 vs 2,990, a 21.6% lead for the Core Ultra 7 265HX that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 11,408 vs 17,417 (41.7% advantage for the Core Ultra 7 265HX). L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 30 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 7 265HX.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Core Ultra 7 265HX
Cores / Threads	10 / 16	20 / 20+100%
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz	5.3 GHz+15%
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	2.6 GHz+4%
L3 Cache	20 MB (total)	30 MB (total)+50%
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)	3 MB (per core)+140%
Process	Intel 7 nm	3 nm-57%
Architecture	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)	Arrow Lake-HX (2025)
PassMark	25,029	48,975+96%
Cinebench R23 Multi	16,211	—
Geekbench 6 Single	2,407	2,990+24%
Geekbench 6 Multi	11,408	17,417+53%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-13400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Core Ultra 7 265HX uses FCBGA2114 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. 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 WM880,HM870 (Core Ultra 7 265HX).

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Core Ultra 7 265HX
Socket	LGA1700	FCBGA2114
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200	DDR5-6400
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB	192 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	20

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Core Ultra 7 265HX has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Core Ultra 7 265HX supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. The Core Ultra 7 265HX includes integrated graphics (Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU), 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 Ultra 7 265HX
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU
Unlocked	No	Yes
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 Ultra 7 265HX debuted at $450. On MSRP ($196 vs $450), the Core i5-13400F is $254 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 108.8 pts/$ for the Core Ultra 7 265HX — making the Core i5-13400F the 16% better value option.