Core i5-13400F vs Ryzen Threadripper 1950

CPU

GPU

Core i5-13400F

10 Cores16 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.6 GHz2023

Core family

·······

Buy on Amazon

Ryzen Threadripper 1950

16 Cores32 Thrd180 WWMax: 3.2 GHz2017

Threadripper family

···

Buy on Amazon

Core i5-13400F vs Ryzen Threadripper 1950 Performance Spectrum

Core i5-13400F

10 / 16

25,029

+13.4%

Ryzen Threadripper 1950

16 / 32

22,077

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen 9 9900X3D

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

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 Ryzen Threadripper 1950 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 Ryzen Threadripper 1950: 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: +3.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $803 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $999 MSRP).
✅Delivers 477.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 22.1 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $999 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 180W, a 115W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of SP3r2 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (16,211 vs 18,780).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 32 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Ryzen Threadripper 1950, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.

Ryzen Threadripper 1950

2017

Why buy it

✅+15.8% higher Cinebench R23 multi-core.
✅+60% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅220% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 22.1 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($999 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌176.9% higher power demand at 180W vs 65W.
❌Older platform position on SP3r2 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-13400F better than Ryzen Threadripper 1950?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Ryzen Threadripper 1950 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i5-13400F is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Ryzen Threadripper 1950 is the stronger fit. You are getting 15.8% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 16 cores and 32 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 60% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 20 MB).

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 $803 cheaper on MSRP at $196 MSRP versus $999 MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Ryzen Threadripper 1950 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 15.8% better Cinebench R23 multi-core. It is also 477.8% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 22.1 PassMark/$), 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 2017) and a healthier platform with LGA1700 and DDR5 instead of SP3r2. That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

Core i5-13400F vs Ryzen Threadripper 1950 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.

Ryzen Threadripper 1950

The Ryzen Threadripper 1950 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 29 July 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Zen (2017−2020) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: SP3r2. Thermal design power (TDP): 180 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Quad-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 22,077 points. Launch price was $299.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Ryzen Threadripper 1950 offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the Ryzen Threadripper 1950 has 6 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 3.2 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper 1950 — a 35.9% 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 Ryzen Threadripper 1950 uses Zen (2017−2020) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Ryzen Threadripper 1950's 22,077 — a 12.5% lead for the Core i5-13400F. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 16,211 vs 18,780 (14.7% advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper 1950). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,407 vs 1,961, a 20.4% lead for the Core i5-13400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 11,408 vs 10,100 (12.2% advantage for the Core i5-13400F). L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 32 MB on the Ryzen Threadripper 1950.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Ryzen Threadripper 1950
Cores / Threads	10 / 16	16 / 32+60%
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz+44%	3.2 GHz
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	3.2 GHz+28%
L3 Cache	20 MB (total)	32 MB+60%
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)+150%	512 kB (per core)
Process	Intel 7 nm-50%	14 nm
Architecture	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)	Zen (2017−2020)
PassMark	25,029+13%	22,077
Cinebench R23 Multi	16,211	18,780+16%
Geekbench 6 Single	2,407+23%	1,961
Geekbench 6 Multi	11,408+13%	10,100

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-13400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Ryzen Threadripper 1950 uses SP3r2 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-13400F versus DDR4-2666 on the Ryzen Threadripper 1950 — the Core i5-13400F supports 80% 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 128 GB — 50% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-13400F) vs 4 (Ryzen Threadripper 1950). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 64 (Ryzen Threadripper 1950) — the Ryzen Threadripper 1950 offers 44 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-13400F) and X399 (Ryzen Threadripper 1950).

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Ryzen Threadripper 1950
Socket	LGA1700	SP3r2
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200+80%	DDR4-2666
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB+50%	128 GB
RAM Channels	2	4+100%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	64+220%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Ryzen Threadripper 1950 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 (Ryzen Threadripper 1950). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming, Ryzen Threadripper 1950 targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600; Ryzen Threadripper 1950 rivals Core i9-7960X.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Ryzen Threadripper 1950
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	No	Yes
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	AMD-V
Target Use	Gaming	Workstation

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core i5-13400F was priced at $196, while the Ryzen Threadripper 1950 came in at $999. On launch pricing ($196 vs $999), Core i5-13400F was $803 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 22.1 pts/$ for the Ryzen Threadripper 1950 — making the Core i5-13400F the 141% better value option.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Ryzen Threadripper 1950
MSRP	$196-80%	$999
Performance per Dollar	127.7+478%	22.1
Release Date	2023	2017

Search Core i5-13400F on Amazon

Search Ryzen Threadripper 1950 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.