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

✅Costs $1,143 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $1,339 MSRP).
✅Delivers 277.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 33.8 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $1,339 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 290W, a 225W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon w5-3525.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon w5-3525 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (25,029 vs 45,311).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 45 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon w5-3525, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 112 PCIe lanes.

Xeon w5-3525

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +57.2% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+125% larger total L3 cache (45 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 112 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅460% more PCIe lanes (112 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 33.8 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($1,339 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌346.2% higher power demand at 290W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Core i5-13400F

2023

Xeon w5-3525

2024

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,143 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $1,339 MSRP).
✅Delivers 277.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 33.8 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $1,339 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 290W, a 225W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon w5-3525.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +57.2% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+125% larger total L3 cache (45 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 112 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅460% more PCIe lanes (112 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon w5-3525 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (25,029 vs 45,311).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 45 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon w5-3525, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 112 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 33.8 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($1,339 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌346.2% higher power demand at 290W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon w5-3525 better than Core i5-13400F?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon w5-3525 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, Xeon w5-3525 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 57.2% more average FPS across 4 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon w5-3525 is the better fit. You are getting 81% better PassMark, backed by 16 cores and 32 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 125% larger total L3 cache (45 MB vs 20 MB).

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

Xeon w5-3525 is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-13400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Xeon w5-3525 is 583.2% more expensive on MSRP at $1,339 MSRP versus $196 MSRP, and it gives you a 57.2% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-13400F is also 277.4% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 33.8 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

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

Xeon w5-3525 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2023), 125% larger total L3 cache (45 MB vs 20 MB), more multi-core headroom with 16 cores / 32 threads instead of 10/16, and AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. 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 w5-3525 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Xeon w5-3525
1080p
low	171 FPS	299 FPS
medium	158 FPS	285 FPS
high	132 FPS	228 FPS
ultra	112 FPS	192 FPS
1440p
low	143 FPS	269 FPS
medium	123 FPS	231 FPS
high	99 FPS	174 FPS
ultra	84 FPS	152 FPS
4K
low	81 FPS	183 FPS
medium	74 FPS	156 FPS
high	59 FPS	118 FPS
ultra	46 FPS	105 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Xeon w5-3525

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Xeon w5-3525
1080p
low	545 FPS	688 FPS
medium	464 FPS	594 FPS
high	389 FPS	478 FPS
ultra	356 FPS	423 FPS
1440p
low	458 FPS	551 FPS
medium	403 FPS	487 FPS
high	345 FPS	411 FPS
ultra	301 FPS	337 FPS
4K
low	280 FPS	324 FPS
medium	247 FPS	287 FPS
high	231 FPS	266 FPS
ultra	204 FPS	231 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Xeon w5-3525

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Xeon w5-3525
1080p
low	530 FPS	1025 FPS
medium	449 FPS	1045 FPS
high	415 FPS	967 FPS
ultra	375 FPS	829 FPS
1440p
low	490 FPS	994 FPS
medium	422 FPS	880 FPS
high	382 FPS	798 FPS
ultra	343 FPS	656 FPS
4K
low	393 FPS	593 FPS
medium	331 FPS	510 FPS
high	296 FPS	458 FPS
ultra	246 FPS	395 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Xeon w5-3525

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Xeon w5-3525
1080p
low	626 FPS	1133 FPS
medium	626 FPS	1015 FPS
high	626 FPS	999 FPS
ultra	626 FPS	866 FPS
1440p
low	626 FPS	1061 FPS
medium	626 FPS	918 FPS
high	598 FPS	794 FPS
ultra	521 FPS	656 FPS
4K
low	535 FPS	791 FPS
medium	492 FPS	688 FPS
high	439 FPS	583 FPS
ultra	382 FPS	437 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Xeon w5-3525

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and Xeon w5-3525

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 w5-3525

The Xeon w5-3525 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 August 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 4.8 GHz. L3 cache: 45 MB. L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4677. Thermal design power (TDP): 290 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 45,311 points. Launch price was $1,339.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon w5-3525 offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the Xeon w5-3525 has 6 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 4.8 GHz on the Xeon w5-3525 — a 4.3% clock advantage for the Xeon w5-3525 (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 Xeon w5-3525 uses Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) (Intel 7 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Xeon w5-3525's 45,311 — a 57.7% lead for the Xeon w5-3525. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 45 MB on the Xeon w5-3525.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Xeon w5-3525
Cores / Threads	10 / 16	16 / 32+60%
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz	4.8 GHz+4%
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	3.2 GHz+28%
L3 Cache	20 MB (total)	45 MB+125%
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)	2 MB (per core)+60%
Process	Intel 7 nm	Intel 7 nm
Architecture	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)	Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024)
PassMark	25,029	45,311+81%
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 w5-3525 uses LGA4677 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-13400F versus 4800 on the Xeon w5-3525 — the Xeon w5-3525 supports 199.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon w5-3525 supports up to 4096 of RAM compared to 192 GB — 182.1% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-13400F) vs 8 (Xeon w5-3525). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 112 (Xeon w5-3525) — the Xeon w5-3525 offers 92 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-13400F) and W790 (Xeon w5-3525).

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Xeon w5-3525
Socket	LGA1700	LGA4677
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200	4800+95900%
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB+4915100%	4096
RAM Channels	2	8+300%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	112+460%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Xeon w5-3525 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Xeon w5-3525 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600; Xeon w5-3525 rivals Threadripper PRO 7955WX.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Xeon w5-3525
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	—	None
Unlocked	No	Yes
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	Gaming	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the Xeon w5-3525 debuted at $1339. On MSRP ($196 vs $1339), the Core i5-13400F is $1143 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 33.8 pts/$ for the Xeon w5-3525 — making the Core i5-13400F the 116.2% better value option.