Core i5-13400F
E2-3800
Core i5-13400F vs E2-3800 Performance Spectrum
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.
Core i5-13400F vs E2-3800 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.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Among Us
Apex Legends
ARC Raiders
Baldur's Gate 3
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
Core i5-13400F vs E2-3800: 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
2023Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +647.4% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Delivers 1024.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 11.4 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $100 MSRP).
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of FT3 and older memory support.
- ✅400% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 4) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike E2-3800.
Trade-offs
- ❌96% HIGHER MSRP$196 MSRPvs$100 MSRP
- ❌333.3% higher power demand at 65W vs 15W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while E2-3800 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
E2-3800
2013Why buy it
- ✅Costs $96 less on MSRP ($100 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 15W instead of 65W, a 50W reduction.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 8280, while Core i5-13400F needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (389 vs 11,408).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 11.4 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($100 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌Older platform position on FT3, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i5-13400F better than E2-3800?
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?
Core i5-13400F vs E2-3800 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.
E2-3800
The E2-3800 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Kabini (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Max frequency: 1.3 GHz. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT3. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 1,136 points. Launch price was $50.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the E2-3800 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Core i5-13400F has 6 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 1.3 GHz on the E2-3800 — a 111.9% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F. The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the E2-3800 uses Kabini (2013−2014) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the E2-3800's 1,136 — a 182.6% lead for the Core i5-13400F. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,407 vs 136, a 178.6% lead for the Core i5-13400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 11,408 vs 389 (186.8% advantage for the Core i5-13400F).
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | E2-3800 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 10 / 16+150% | 4 / 4 |
| Boost Clock | 4.6 GHz+254% | 1.3 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 20 MB (total) | — |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 2048 kB+60% |
| Process | Intel 7 nm-75% | 28 nm |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) | Kabini (2013−2014) |
| PassMark | 25,029+2103% | 1,136 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 16,211 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 2,407+1670% | 136 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 11,408+2833% | 389 |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-13400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the E2-3800 uses FT3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-13400F versus DDR3-1600 on the E2-3800 — the Core i5-13400F supports 200% 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 16 GB — 1100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-13400F) vs 1 (E2-3800). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 4 (E2-3800) — the Core i5-13400F offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-13400F) and SoC (E2-3800).
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | E2-3800 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | FT3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+150% | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200+200% | DDR3-1600 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 192 GB+1100% | 16 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2+100% | 1 |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 20+400% | 4 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F) vs Yes (E2-3800). The E2-3800 includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 8280), 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 | E2-3800 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Radeon HD 8280 |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | Yes |
| Target Use | Gaming | — |
Value Analysis
At launch, the Core i5-13400F was priced at $196, while the E2-3800 came in at $100. On launch pricing ($196 vs $100), E2-3800 was $96 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 11.4 pts/$ for the E2-3800 — making the Core i5-13400F the 167.3% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | E2-3800 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $196 | $100-49% |
| Performance per Dollar | 127.7+1020% | 11.4 |
| Release Date | 2023 | 2013 |
Affiliate Disclosure
ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.
Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Core i5-13400F and E2-3800
