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

✅+14.9% higher PassMark.
✅+25% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 16 MB).
✅Costs $204 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $400 MSRP).
✅Delivers 134.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 54.5 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $400 MSRP).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 PRO 250 across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌712.5% higher power demand at 65W vs 8W.

Ryzen 7 PRO 250

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +16.6% higher average FPS across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 8W instead of 65W, a 57W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (21,789 vs 25,029).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (16 MB vs 20 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 54.5 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($400 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Core i5-13400F

2023

Ryzen 7 PRO 250

2025

Why buy it

✅+14.9% higher PassMark.
✅+25% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 16 MB).
✅Costs $204 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $400 MSRP).
✅Delivers 134.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 54.5 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $400 MSRP).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +16.6% higher average FPS across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 8W instead of 65W, a 57W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 PRO 250 across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌712.5% higher power demand at 65W vs 8W.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (21,789 vs 25,029).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (16 MB vs 20 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 54.5 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($400 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen 7 PRO 250 better than Core i5-13400F?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, Ryzen 7 PRO 250 is ahead with a 16.6% average FPS lead across 8 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i5-13400F pulls ahead with 14.9% better PassMark. 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 14.9% better PassMark, 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?

Ryzen 7 PRO 250 is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-13400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Ryzen 7 PRO 250 is 104.1% more expensive on MSRP at $400 MSRP versus $196 MSRP, and it gives you a 16.6% average FPS lead across 8 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that Core i5-13400F is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 14.9% better PassMark. Core i5-13400F is also 134.4% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 54.5 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

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

Ryzen 7 PRO 250 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2023). That should give you a better long-term upgrade path for motherboard, RAM, and future CPU swaps.

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 PRO 250 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Ryzen 7 PRO 250
1080p
low	171 FPS	259 FPS
medium	158 FPS	238 FPS
high	132 FPS	201 FPS
ultra	112 FPS	173 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

Open Core i5-13400F Open Ryzen 7 PRO 250

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Ryzen 7 PRO 250
1080p
low	545 FPS	492 FPS
medium	464 FPS	408 FPS
high	389 FPS	356 FPS
ultra	356 FPS	319 FPS
1440p
low	458 FPS	430 FPS
medium	403 FPS	376 FPS
high	345 FPS	328 FPS
ultra	301 FPS	281 FPS
4K
low	280 FPS	284 FPS
medium	247 FPS	259 FPS
high	231 FPS	248 FPS
ultra	204 FPS	214 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Ryzen 7 PRO 250

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Ryzen 7 PRO 250
1080p
low	530 FPS	545 FPS
medium	449 FPS	545 FPS
high	415 FPS	545 FPS
ultra	375 FPS	522 FPS
1440p
low	490 FPS	545 FPS
medium	422 FPS	545 FPS
high	382 FPS	523 FPS
ultra	343 FPS	449 FPS
4K
low	393 FPS	523 FPS
medium	331 FPS	457 FPS
high	296 FPS	405 FPS
ultra	246 FPS	343 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Ryzen 7 PRO 250

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Ryzen 7 PRO 250
1080p
low	626 FPS	545 FPS
medium	626 FPS	545 FPS
high	626 FPS	545 FPS
ultra	626 FPS	545 FPS
1440p
low	626 FPS	545 FPS
medium	626 FPS	545 FPS
high	598 FPS	545 FPS
ultra	521 FPS	545 FPS
4K
low	535 FPS	545 FPS
medium	492 FPS	502 FPS
high	439 FPS	449 FPS
ultra	382 FPS	385 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Ryzen 7 PRO 250

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and Ryzen 7 PRO 250

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 PRO 250

The Ryzen 7 PRO 250 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) (2023−2025) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.3 GHz, with boost up to 5.1 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB. L2 cache: 8 MB. Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: FP8. Thermal design power (TDP): 8 MB + 16 MB. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 21,789 points. Launch price was $299.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Ryzen 7 PRO 250 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 5.1 GHz on the Ryzen 7 PRO 250 — a 10.3% clock advantage for the Ryzen 7 PRO 250 (base: 2.5 GHz vs 3.3 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Ryzen 7 PRO 250 uses Hawk Point-U (Zen 4) (2023−2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Ryzen 7 PRO 250's 21,789 — a 13.8% lead for the Core i5-13400F. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 16 MB on the Ryzen 7 PRO 250.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Ryzen 7 PRO 250
Cores / Threads	10 / 16+25%	8 / 16
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz	5.1 GHz+11%
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	3.3 GHz+32%
L3 Cache	20 MB (total)+25%	16 MB
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)	8 MB+540%
Process	Intel 7 nm	4 nm-43%
Architecture	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)	Hawk Point-U (Zen 4) (2023−2025)
PassMark	25,029+15%	21,789
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 7 PRO 250 uses FP8 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Ryzen 7 PRO 250
Socket	LGA1700	FP8
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
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 7 PRO 250). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Ryzen 7 PRO 250
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 7 PRO 250 debuted at $400. On MSRP ($196 vs $400), the Core i5-13400F is $204 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 54.5 pts/$ for the Ryzen 7 PRO 250 — making the Core i5-13400F the 80.4% better value option.