Core i5-13400F vs FX-8320E

CPU

GPU

Core i5-13400F

10 Cores16 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.6 GHz2023

Core family

·······

Buy on Amazon

FX-8320E

8 Cores8 Thrd95 WWMax: 4 GHz2014

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Core i5-13400F vs FX-8320E Performance Spectrum

Core i5-13400F

10 / 16

25,029

+404.6%

4,960

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX

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 FX-8320E 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 FX-8320E: 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

✅Better for gaming: +91.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Delivers 278.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 33.7 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $147 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 95W, a 30W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of AM3+ and older memory support.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌
33.3% HIGHER MSRP
$196 MSRPvs$147 MSRP

FX-8320E

2014

Why buy it

✅Costs $49 less on MSRP ($147 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (1,734 vs 11,408).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 33.7 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($147 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌46.2% higher power demand at 95W vs 65W.
❌Older platform position on AM3+, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-13400F better than FX-8320E?

Yes. Core i5-13400F is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 91.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 557.9% better Geekbench multi-core, 404.6% higher 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 i5-13400F is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 91.0% 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 i5-13400F is the stronger fit. You are getting 557.9% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 10 cores and 16 threads.

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

Core i5-13400F is the better buy right now. Core i5-13400F comes in 33.3% more expensive on MSRP at $196 MSRP versus $147 MSRP, and it still gives you a 91.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 278.5% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 33.7 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Core i5-13400F makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2023 vs 2014), a healthier platform with LGA1700 and DDR5 instead of AM3+, and more multi-core headroom with 10 cores / 16 threads instead of 8/8. That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

Core i5-13400F vs FX-8320E 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.

FX-8320E

The FX-8320E is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2 September 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Vishera (2012−2015) architecture. It features 8 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L2 cache: 8192 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: AM3+. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 4,960 points. Launch price was $147.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the FX-8320E offers 8 cores / 8 threads — the Core i5-13400F has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 4 GHz on the FX-8320E — a 14% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 3.2 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the FX-8320E uses Vishera (2012−2015) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the FX-8320E's 4,960 — a 133.8% lead for the Core i5-13400F. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,407 vs 439, a 138.3% lead for the Core i5-13400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 11,408 vs 1,734 (147.2% advantage for the Core i5-13400F).

Feature	Core i5-13400F	FX-8320E
Cores / Threads	10 / 16+25%	8 / 8
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz+15%	4 GHz
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	3.2 GHz+28%
L3 Cache	20 MB (total)	—
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)	8192 kB+540%
Process	Intel 7 nm-78%	32 nm
Architecture	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)	Vishera (2012−2015)
PassMark	25,029+405%	4,960
Cinebench R23 Multi	16,211	—
Geekbench 6 Single	2,407+448%	439
Geekbench 6 Multi	11,408+558%	1,734

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-13400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the FX-8320E uses AM3+ (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-13400F versus DDR3-1866 on the FX-8320E — the Core i5-13400F supports 157.2% 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 32 GB — 500% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 0 (FX-8320E) — the Core i5-13400F offers 20 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-13400F) and AMD 990FX,AMD 970 (FX-8320E).

Feature	Core i5-13400F	FX-8320E
Socket	LGA1700	AM3+
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+150%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200+157%	DDR3-1866
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB+500%	32 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	20	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the FX-8320E has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F) vs AMD-V (FX-8320E). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	FX-8320E
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	No	Yes
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	AMD-V
Target Use	Gaming	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core i5-13400F was priced at $196, while the FX-8320E came in at $147. On launch pricing ($196 vs $147), FX-8320E was $49 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 33.7 pts/$ for the FX-8320E — making the Core i5-13400F the 116.4% better value option.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	FX-8320E
MSRP	$196	$147-25%
Performance per Dollar	127.7+279%	33.7
Release Date	2023	2014

Search Core i5-13400F on Amazon

Search FX-8320E on Amazon

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.