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

✅Better for gaming: +22.2% higher average FPS across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $271 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $467 MSRP).
✅Delivers 274.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 34.1 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $467 MSRP).
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of FCBGA1787 and DDR4.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 24 MB).
❌160% higher power demand at 65W vs 25W.

Xeon W-11865MLE

2021

Why buy it

✅+20% larger total L3 cache (24 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Draws 25W instead of 65W, a 40W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (15,917 vs 25,029).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 34.1 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($467 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌Older platform position on FCBGA1787 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Core i5-13400F

2023

Xeon W-11865MLE

2021

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +22.2% higher average FPS across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $271 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $467 MSRP).
✅Delivers 274.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 34.1 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $467 MSRP).
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of FCBGA1787 and DDR4.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Why buy it

✅+20% larger total L3 cache (24 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Draws 25W instead of 65W, a 40W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 24 MB).
❌160% higher power demand at 65W vs 25W.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (15,917 vs 25,029).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 34.1 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($467 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌Older platform position on FCBGA1787 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 Xeon W-11865MLE?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon W-11865MLE makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i5-13400F is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i5-13400F is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 22.2% more average FPS across 8 shared CPU game tests.

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 57.2% better PassMark, backed by 10 cores and 16 threads.

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

Core i5-13400F is the smarter buy today. Core i5-13400F is $271 cheaper on MSRP at $196 MSRP versus $467 MSRP, and it gives you a 22.2% average FPS lead across 8 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 274.7% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 34.1 PassMark/$), 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 a newer CPU generation (2023 vs 2021), a healthier platform with LGA1700 and DDR5 instead of FCBGA1787, and more multi-core headroom with 10 cores / 16 threads instead of 8/16. 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

Xeon W-11865MLE Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Xeon W-11865MLE
1080p
low	171 FPS	164 FPS
medium	158 FPS	144 FPS
high	132 FPS	116 FPS
ultra	112 FPS	98 FPS
1440p
low	143 FPS	140 FPS
medium	123 FPS	119 FPS
high	99 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	84 FPS	81 FPS
4K
low	81 FPS	77 FPS
medium	74 FPS	70 FPS
high	59 FPS	56 FPS
ultra	46 FPS	43 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Xeon W-11865MLE

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Xeon W-11865MLE
1080p
low	545 FPS	296 FPS
medium	464 FPS	255 FPS
high	389 FPS	216 FPS
ultra	356 FPS	195 FPS
1440p
low	458 FPS	253 FPS
medium	403 FPS	226 FPS
high	345 FPS	197 FPS
ultra	301 FPS	170 FPS
4K
low	280 FPS	157 FPS
medium	247 FPS	142 FPS
high	231 FPS	135 FPS
ultra	204 FPS	119 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Xeon W-11865MLE

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Xeon W-11865MLE
1080p
low	530 FPS	398 FPS
medium	449 FPS	398 FPS
high	415 FPS	398 FPS
ultra	375 FPS	397 FPS
1440p
low	490 FPS	398 FPS
medium	422 FPS	398 FPS
high	382 FPS	397 FPS
ultra	343 FPS	331 FPS
4K
low	393 FPS	379 FPS
medium	331 FPS	315 FPS
high	296 FPS	282 FPS
ultra	246 FPS	224 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Xeon W-11865MLE

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Xeon W-11865MLE
1080p
low	626 FPS	398 FPS
medium	626 FPS	398 FPS
high	626 FPS	398 FPS
ultra	626 FPS	398 FPS
1440p
low	626 FPS	398 FPS
medium	626 FPS	398 FPS
high	598 FPS	398 FPS
ultra	521 FPS	398 FPS
4K
low	535 FPS	398 FPS
medium	492 FPS	398 FPS
high	439 FPS	398 FPS
ultra	382 FPS	363 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Xeon W-11865MLE

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and Xeon W-11865MLE

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.

Xeon W-11865MLE

The Xeon W-11865MLE is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 26 August 2021 (4 years ago). It is based on the Tiger Lake-H (2021) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 4.5 GHz. L3 cache: 24 MB (total). L2 cache: 1.25 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1787. Thermal design power (TDP): 25 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 15,917 points. Launch price was $467.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon W-11865MLE 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 4.5 GHz on the Xeon W-11865MLE — a 2.2% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 1.5 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Xeon W-11865MLE uses Tiger Lake-H (2021) (10 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Xeon W-11865MLE's 15,917 — a 44.5% lead for the Core i5-13400F. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 24 MB (total) on the Xeon W-11865MLE.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Xeon W-11865MLE
Cores / Threads	10 / 16+25%	8 / 16
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz+2%	4.5 GHz
Base Clock	2.5 GHz+67%	1.5 GHz
L3 Cache	20 MB (total)	24 MB (total)+20%
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)	1.25 MB (per core)
Process	Intel 7 nm-30%	10 nm
Architecture	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)	Tiger Lake-H (2021)
PassMark	25,029+57%	15,917
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 Xeon W-11865MLE uses FCBGA1787 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Xeon W-11865MLE
Socket	LGA1700	FCBGA1787
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
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 (Xeon W-11865MLE). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Xeon W-11865MLE
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 Xeon W-11865MLE debuted at $467. On MSRP ($196 vs $467), the Core i5-13400F is $271 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 34.1 pts/$ for the Xeon W-11865MLE — making the Core i5-13400F the 115.7% better value option.