
Core i5-13400F
Popular choices:

Xeon W-1350
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: +17.3% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+66.7% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Costs $59 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $255 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 73.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 73.5 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $255 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 80W, a 15W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Xeon W-1350 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
- ❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.
Xeon W-1350
2021Why buy it
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics P750, while Core i5-13400F needs a discrete GPU.
- ✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (9,104 vs 11,408).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 20 MB).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 73.5 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($255 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌23.1% higher power demand at 80W vs 65W.
Core i5-13400F
2023Xeon W-1350
2021Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +17.3% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+66.7% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Costs $59 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $255 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 73.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 73.5 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $255 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 80W, a 15W reduction.
Why buy it
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics P750, while Core i5-13400F needs a discrete GPU.
- ✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.
Trade-offs
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Xeon W-1350 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
- ❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (9,104 vs 11,408).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 20 MB).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 73.5 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($255 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌23.1% higher power demand at 80W vs 65W.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i5-13400F better than Xeon W-1350?
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 | Xeon W-1350 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 171 FPS | 246 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 229 FPS |
| high | 132 FPS | 191 FPS |
| ultra | 112 FPS | 164 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 143 FPS | 217 FPS |
| medium | 123 FPS | 184 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 148 FPS |
| ultra | 84 FPS | 130 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 81 FPS | 151 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 128 FPS |
| high | 59 FPS | 98 FPS |
| ultra | 46 FPS | 87 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Xeon W-1350 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 545 FPS | 315 FPS |
| medium | 464 FPS | 267 FPS |
| high | 389 FPS | 244 FPS |
| ultra | 356 FPS | 221 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 458 FPS | 280 FPS |
| medium | 403 FPS | 239 FPS |
| high | 345 FPS | 221 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 197 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 280 FPS | 222 FPS |
| medium | 247 FPS | 191 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 179 FPS |
| ultra | 204 FPS | 146 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Xeon W-1350 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 469 FPS |
| medium | 449 FPS | 469 FPS |
| high | 415 FPS | 440 FPS |
| ultra | 375 FPS | 380 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 490 FPS | 469 FPS |
| medium | 422 FPS | 463 FPS |
| high | 382 FPS | 396 FPS |
| ultra | 343 FPS | 345 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 393 FPS | 385 FPS |
| medium | 331 FPS | 337 FPS |
| high | 296 FPS | 293 FPS |
| ultra | 246 FPS | 242 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Xeon W-1350 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 469 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 469 FPS |
| high | 626 FPS | 469 FPS |
| ultra | 626 FPS | 469 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 469 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 469 FPS |
| high | 598 FPS | 469 FPS |
| ultra | 521 FPS | 469 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 535 FPS | 469 FPS |
| medium | 492 FPS | 469 FPS |
| high | 439 FPS | 451 FPS |
| ultra | 382 FPS | 392 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and Xeon W-1350

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.

Xeon W-1350
Xeon W-1350
The Xeon W-1350 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 6 May 2021 (4 years ago). It is based on the Rocket Lake-S (2021) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 3.3 GHz, with boost up to 5 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1200. Thermal design power (TDP): 80 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 18,742 points. Launch price was $255.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon W-1350 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 5 GHz on the Xeon W-1350 — a 8.3% clock advantage for the Xeon W-1350 (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 Xeon W-1350 uses Rocket Lake-S (2021) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Xeon W-1350's 18,742 — a 28.7% lead for the Core i5-13400F. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,407 vs 2,140, a 11.7% lead for the Core i5-13400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 11,408 vs 9,104 (22.5% advantage for the Core i5-13400F). L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 12 MB (total) on the Xeon W-1350.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Xeon W-1350 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 10 / 16+67% | 6 / 12 |
| Boost Clock | 4.6 GHz | 5 GHz+9% |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz | 3.3 GHz+32% |
| L3 Cache | 20 MB (total)+67% | 12 MB (total) |
| 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) | Rocket Lake-S (2021) |
| PassMark | 25,029+34% | 18,742 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 16,211 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 2,407+12% | 2,140 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 11,408+25% | 9,104 |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-13400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon W-1350 uses LGA1200 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-13400F versus DDR4-3200 on the Xeon W-1350 — the Core i5-13400F supports 22.2% 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 — 40% 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 W580,C252,C256 (Xeon W-1350).
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Xeon W-1350 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | LGA1200 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200+25% | DDR4-3200 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 192 GB+50% | 128 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | 20 |
Advanced Features
Only the Xeon W-1350 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F) vs Yes (Xeon W-1350). The Xeon W-1350 includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics P750), while the Core i5-13400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Xeon W-1350 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | UHD Graphics P750 |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | Yes |
| Target Use | Gaming | — |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the Xeon W-1350 debuted at $255. On MSRP ($196 vs $255), the Core i5-13400F is $59 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 73.5 pts/$ for the Xeon W-1350 — making the Core i5-13400F the 53.9% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Xeon W-1350 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $196-23% | $255 |
| Performance per Dollar | 127.7+74% | 73.5 |
| Release Date | 2023 | 2021 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













