
Core i5-13400F
Popular choices:

Ryzen 5 PRO 220
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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
2023Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +4.0% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+25% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 16 MB).
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen 5 PRO 220.
Trade-offs
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $196 MSRP, while Ryzen 5 PRO 220 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌983.3% higher power demand at 65W vs 6W.
Ryzen 5 PRO 220
2025Why buy it
- ✅Draws 6W instead of 65W, a 59W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (19,889 vs 25,029).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (16 MB vs 20 MB).
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Core i5-13400F
2023Ryzen 5 PRO 220
2025Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +4.0% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+25% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 16 MB).
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen 5 PRO 220.
Why buy it
- ✅Draws 6W instead of 65W, a 59W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $196 MSRP, while Ryzen 5 PRO 220 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌983.3% higher power demand at 65W vs 6W.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (19,889 vs 25,029).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (16 MB vs 20 MB).
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i5-13400F better than Ryzen 5 PRO 220?
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?
Games Benchmarks
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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen 5 PRO 220 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 171 FPS | 259 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 237 FPS |
| high | 132 FPS | 199 FPS |
| ultra | 112 FPS | 171 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 143 FPS | 229 FPS |
| medium | 123 FPS | 191 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 155 FPS |
| ultra | 84 FPS | 137 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 81 FPS | 159 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 134 FPS |
| high | 59 FPS | 104 FPS |
| ultra | 46 FPS | 92 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen 5 PRO 220 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 545 FPS | 386 FPS |
| medium | 464 FPS | 320 FPS |
| high | 389 FPS | 284 FPS |
| ultra | 356 FPS | 248 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 458 FPS | 324 FPS |
| medium | 403 FPS | 280 FPS |
| high | 345 FPS | 255 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 218 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 280 FPS | 243 FPS |
| medium | 247 FPS | 214 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 201 FPS |
| ultra | 204 FPS | 169 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen 5 PRO 220 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 497 FPS |
| medium | 449 FPS | 497 FPS |
| high | 415 FPS | 497 FPS |
| ultra | 375 FPS | 497 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 490 FPS | 497 FPS |
| medium | 422 FPS | 497 FPS |
| high | 382 FPS | 497 FPS |
| ultra | 343 FPS | 430 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 393 FPS | 484 FPS |
| medium | 331 FPS | 425 FPS |
| high | 296 FPS | 362 FPS |
| ultra | 246 FPS | 299 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen 5 PRO 220 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 497 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 497 FPS |
| high | 626 FPS | 497 FPS |
| ultra | 626 FPS | 497 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 497 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 497 FPS |
| high | 598 FPS | 497 FPS |
| ultra | 521 FPS | 497 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 535 FPS | 497 FPS |
| medium | 492 FPS | 497 FPS |
| high | 439 FPS | 441 FPS |
| ultra | 382 FPS | 377 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and Ryzen 5 PRO 220

Core i5-13400F
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.


Ryzen 5 PRO 220
Ryzen 5 PRO 220
The Ryzen 5 PRO 220 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 6 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Hawk Point-U (Zen 4 + Zen 4c) (2023−2025) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 4.9 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB. L2 cache: 6 MB. Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: FP7/FP7r2. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 MB + 16 MB. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 19,889 points. Launch price was $299.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Ryzen 5 PRO 220 offers 6 cores / 12 threads — the Core i5-13400F has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 4.9 GHz on the Ryzen 5 PRO 220 — a 6.3% clock advantage for the Ryzen 5 PRO 220 (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 Ryzen 5 PRO 220 uses Hawk Point-U (Zen 4 + Zen 4c) (2023−2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Ryzen 5 PRO 220's 19,889 — a 22.9% lead for the Core i5-13400F. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 16 MB on the Ryzen 5 PRO 220.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen 5 PRO 220 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 10 / 16+67% | 6 / 12 |
| Boost Clock | 4.6 GHz | 4.9 GHz+7% |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz | 3.2 GHz+28% |
| L3 Cache | 20 MB (total)+25% | 16 MB |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 6 MB+380% |
| Process | Intel 7 nm | 4 nm-43% |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) | Hawk Point-U (Zen 4 + Zen 4c) (2023−2025) |
| PassMark | 25,029+26% | 19,889 |
| 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 Ryzen 5 PRO 220 uses FP7/FP7r2 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen 5 PRO 220 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | FP7/FP7r2 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+67% | PCIe 3.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 192 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 2 | — |
| ECC Support | No | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | — |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F) / not specified (Ryzen 5 PRO 220). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen 5 PRO 220 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | — |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | — |
| Target Use | Gaming | — |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the Ryzen 5 PRO 220 debuted at $0. On MSRP ($196 vs $0), the Ryzen 5 PRO 220 is $196 cheaper.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen 5 PRO 220 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $196 | $0-100% |
| Performance per Dollar | 127.7 | — |
| Release Date | 2023 | 2025 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












