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

✅+20.1% higher Cinebench R23 multi-core.
✅+25% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 16 MB).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen 7 7735HS.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 7735HS across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Launch MSRP is still $196 MSRP, while Ryzen 7 7735HS mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Ryzen 7 7735HS can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Ryzen 7 7735HS

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +11.7% higher average FPS across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon 680M, while Core i5-13400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (13,500 vs 16,211).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (16 MB vs 20 MB).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Core i5-13400F

2023

Ryzen 7 7735HS

2023

Why buy it

✅+20.1% higher Cinebench R23 multi-core.
✅+25% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 16 MB).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen 7 7735HS.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +11.7% higher average FPS across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon 680M, while Core i5-13400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 7735HS across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Launch MSRP is still $196 MSRP, while Ryzen 7 7735HS mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Ryzen 7 7735HS can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (13,500 vs 16,211).
❌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 7 7735HS?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, Ryzen 7 7735HS is ahead with a 11.7% average FPS lead across 6 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i5-13400F pulls ahead with 20.1% better Cinebench R23 multi-core. Core i5-13400F also has the bigger cache pool with 25% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 16 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i5-13400F is the better fit. You are getting 20.1% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 10 cores and 16 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 25% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 16 MB).

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

Core i5-13400F is the smarter buy today. Core i5-13400F is at an unclear MSRP at $196 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it gives you 20.1% better Cinebench R23 multi-core. The trade-off is that Ryzen 7 7735HS is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 11.7% average FPS lead across 6 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

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

Core i5-13400F is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting 25% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 16 MB) and more multi-core headroom with 10 cores / 16 threads instead of 8/16. That extra compute headroom should age better as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

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

Ryzen 7 7735HS Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Ryzen 7 7735HS
1080p
low	171 FPS	246 FPS
medium	158 FPS	230 FPS
high	132 FPS	192 FPS
ultra	112 FPS	165 FPS
1440p
low	143 FPS	217 FPS
medium	123 FPS	184 FPS
high	99 FPS	149 FPS
ultra	84 FPS	131 FPS
4K
low	81 FPS	152 FPS
medium	74 FPS	129 FPS
high	59 FPS	99 FPS
ultra	46 FPS	87 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Ryzen 7 7735HS

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Ryzen 7 7735HS
1080p
low	545 FPS	464 FPS
medium	464 FPS	392 FPS
high	389 FPS	339 FPS
ultra	356 FPS	296 FPS
1440p
low	458 FPS	397 FPS
medium	403 FPS	347 FPS
high	345 FPS	306 FPS
ultra	301 FPS	258 FPS
4K
low	280 FPS	274 FPS
medium	247 FPS	246 FPS
high	231 FPS	229 FPS
ultra	204 FPS	195 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Ryzen 7 7735HS

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Ryzen 7 7735HS
1080p
low	530 FPS	572 FPS
medium	449 FPS	572 FPS
high	415 FPS	494 FPS
ultra	375 FPS	403 FPS
1440p
low	490 FPS	572 FPS
medium	422 FPS	520 FPS
high	382 FPS	443 FPS
ultra	343 FPS	365 FPS
4K
low	393 FPS	452 FPS
medium	331 FPS	380 FPS
high	296 FPS	333 FPS
ultra	246 FPS	272 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Ryzen 7 7735HS

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Ryzen 7 7735HS
1080p
low	626 FPS	572 FPS
medium	626 FPS	572 FPS
high	626 FPS	572 FPS
ultra	626 FPS	572 FPS
1440p
low	626 FPS	572 FPS
medium	626 FPS	572 FPS
high	598 FPS	572 FPS
ultra	521 FPS	510 FPS
4K
low	535 FPS	533 FPS
medium	492 FPS	487 FPS
high	439 FPS	434 FPS
ultra	382 FPS	376 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Ryzen 7 7735HS

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and Ryzen 7 7735HS

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 7 7735HS

The Ryzen 7 7735HS is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 1 April 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Rembrandt-HS Refresh (2023) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 4.75 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 6 nm process technology. Socket: FP7. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 22,897 points. Launch price was $299.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Ryzen 7 7735HS offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Core i5-13400F has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 4.75 GHz on the Ryzen 7 7735HS — a 3.2% clock advantage for the Ryzen 7 7735HS (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 7 7735HS uses Rembrandt-HS Refresh (2023) (6 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Ryzen 7 7735HS's 22,897 — a 8.9% lead for the Core i5-13400F. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 16,211 vs 13,500 (18.2% advantage for the Core i5-13400F). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,407 vs 1,900, a 23.5% lead for the Core i5-13400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 11,408 vs 8,800 (25.8% advantage for the Core i5-13400F). L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 16 MB (total) on the Ryzen 7 7735HS.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Ryzen 7 7735HS
Cores / Threads	10 / 16+25%	8 / 16
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz	4.75 GHz+3%
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	3.2 GHz+28%
L3 Cache	20 MB (total)+25%	16 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)+150%	512 kB (per core)
Process	Intel 7 nm	6 nm-14%
Architecture	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)	Rembrandt-HS Refresh (2023)
PassMark	25,029+9%	22,897
Cinebench R23 Multi	16,211+20%	13,500
Geekbench 6 Single	2,407+27%	1,900
Geekbench 6 Multi	11,408+30%	8,800

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-13400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Ryzen 7 7735HS uses FP7 (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 64 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. 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 SoC (Ryzen 7 7735HS).

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Ryzen 7 7735HS
Socket	LGA1700	FP7
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200	LPDDR5-6400
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB+200%	64 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	20

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F) vs AMD-V (Ryzen 7 7735HS). The Ryzen 7 7735HS includes integrated graphics (Radeon 680M), while the Core i5-13400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming, Ryzen 7 7735HS targets High Performance Laptop. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.