Core i5-13400F vs M2 Max

CPU

GPU

Core i5-13400F

10 Cores16 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.6 GHz2023

Popular choices:

•••••••••

M2 Max

12 Cores12 Thrd36 WWMax: 3.7 GHz2023

Popular choices:

••••i5-13400F•••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i5-13400F

10 / 16

25,029

0.0%

26,824

+7.2%

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

2023

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike M2 Max.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (25,029 vs 26,824).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 48 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $196 MSRP, while M2 Max mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌80.6% higher power demand at 65W vs 36W.
❌No integrated graphics, while M2 Max can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

M2 Max

2023

Why buy it

✅+7.2% higher PassMark.
✅+140% larger total L3 cache (48 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Draws 36W instead of 65W, a 29W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Apple M2 Max GPU, while Core i5-13400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

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

Core i5-13400F

2023

M2 Max

2023

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike M2 Max.

Why buy it

✅+7.2% higher PassMark.
✅+140% larger total L3 cache (48 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Draws 36W instead of 65W, a 29W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Apple M2 Max GPU, while Core i5-13400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (25,029 vs 26,824).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 48 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $196 MSRP, while M2 Max mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌80.6% higher power demand at 65W vs 36W.
❌No integrated graphics, while M2 Max can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

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

Quick Answers

So, is M2 Max better than Core i5-13400F?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, Core i5-13400F is ahead with a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, M2 Max pulls ahead with 7.2% better PassMark. M2 Max also has the bigger cache pool with 140% larger total L3 cache (48 MB vs 20 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, M2 Max is the better fit. You are getting 7.2% better PassMark, backed by 12 cores and 12 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 140% larger total L3 cache (48 MB vs 20 MB).

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

M2 Max is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-13400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. M2 Max is at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $196 MSRP, and it gives you 7.2% better PassMark. The trade-off is that Core i5-13400F is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-13400F is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper. That said, if you already own a compatible LGA1700 + DDR5 setup, Core i5-13400F can still make sense as a platform-matched option because it avoids a motherboard and RAM swap, but on MSRP alone you would want to find it meaningfully cheaper in real-world listings before that path becomes easy to justify.

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

M2 Max is the safer long-term CPU choice because it gives you more overall headroom and a better platform outlook.

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

M2 Max Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	M2 Max
1080p
low	171 FPS	189 FPS
medium	158 FPS	152 FPS
high	132 FPS	124 FPS
ultra	112 FPS	98 FPS
1440p
low	143 FPS	155 FPS
medium	123 FPS	121 FPS
high	99 FPS	94 FPS
ultra	84 FPS	76 FPS
4K
low	81 FPS	71 FPS
medium	74 FPS	59 FPS
high	59 FPS	46 FPS
ultra	46 FPS	38 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open M2 Max

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	M2 Max
1080p
low	545 FPS	505 FPS
medium	464 FPS	437 FPS
high	389 FPS	342 FPS
ultra	356 FPS	279 FPS
1440p
low	458 FPS	429 FPS
medium	403 FPS	379 FPS
high	345 FPS	306 FPS
ultra	301 FPS	240 FPS
4K
low	280 FPS	266 FPS
medium	247 FPS	239 FPS
high	231 FPS	210 FPS
ultra	204 FPS	173 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open M2 Max

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-13400F	M2 Max
1080p
low	530 FPS	671 FPS
medium	449 FPS	670 FPS
high	415 FPS	625 FPS
ultra	375 FPS	552 FPS
1440p
low	490 FPS	605 FPS
medium	422 FPS	483 FPS
high	382 FPS	444 FPS
ultra	343 FPS	388 FPS
4K
low	393 FPS	423 FPS
medium	331 FPS	329 FPS
high	296 FPS	292 FPS
ultra	246 FPS	234 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open M2 Max

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-13400F	M2 Max
1080p
low	626 FPS	671 FPS
medium	626 FPS	671 FPS
high	626 FPS	671 FPS
ultra	626 FPS	668 FPS
1440p
low	626 FPS	671 FPS
medium	626 FPS	663 FPS
high	598 FPS	569 FPS
ultra	521 FPS	489 FPS
4K
low	535 FPS	545 FPS
medium	492 FPS	486 FPS
high	439 FPS	427 FPS
ultra	382 FPS	368 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open M2 Max

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and M2 Max

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.

M2 Max

The M2 Max is manufactured by Apple. It was released in 17 January 2023 (2 years ago). It features 12 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 2.424 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 48 MB. L2 cache: 36 MB. Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: none. Thermal design power (TDP): 36 MB + 48 MB. Memory support: LPDDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 26,824 points. Launch price was $299.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the M2 Max offers 12 cores / 12 threads — the M2 Max has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 3.7 GHz on the M2 Max — a 21.7% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2.424 GHz). The Core i5-13400F is built on the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture. In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the M2 Max's 26,824 — a 6.9% lead for the M2 Max. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 48 MB on the M2 Max.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	M2 Max
Cores / Threads	10 / 16	12 / 12+20%
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz+24%	3.7 GHz
Base Clock	2.5 GHz+3%	2.424 GHz
L3 Cache	20 MB (total)	48 MB+140%
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)	36 MB+2780%
Process	Intel 7 nm	5 nm-29%
Architecture	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)	—
PassMark	25,029	26,824+7%
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 M2 Max uses none (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 memory speed. The Core i5-13400F supports up to 192 GB of RAM compared to 96 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-13400F) vs 4 (M2 Max). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 0 (M2 Max) — the Core i5-13400F offers 20 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	M2 Max
Socket	LGA1700	none
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200	LPDDR5-6400
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB+100%	96 GB
RAM Channels	2	4+100%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	20	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F) vs Virtualization (M2 Max). The M2 Max includes integrated graphics (Apple M2 Max GPU), while the Core i5-13400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming, M2 Max targets Mobile. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.