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 $1,493 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $1,689 MSRP).
✅Delivers 307.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 31.4 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $1,689 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 250W, a 185W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon w7-2575X.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon w7-2575X across 10 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (11,408 vs 19,640).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 45 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon w7-2575X, which brings 22 cores / 44 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.

Xeon w7-2575X

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +49.9% higher average FPS across 10 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+125% larger total L3 cache (45 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 22 cores / 44 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅220% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 31.4 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($1,689 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌284.6% higher power demand at 250W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Core i5-13400F

2023

Xeon w7-2575X

2024

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,493 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $1,689 MSRP).
✅Delivers 307.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 31.4 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $1,689 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 250W, a 185W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon w7-2575X.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +49.9% higher average FPS across 10 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+125% larger total L3 cache (45 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 22 cores / 44 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 Xeon w7-2575X across 10 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (11,408 vs 19,640).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 45 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon w7-2575X, which brings 22 cores / 44 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 31.4 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($1,689 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌284.6% higher power demand at 250W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon w7-2575X better than Core i5-13400F?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon w7-2575X 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 w7-2575X is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 49.9% more average FPS across 10 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon w7-2575X is the better fit. You are getting 72.2% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 22 cores and 44 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 w7-2575X is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-13400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Xeon w7-2575X is 761.7% more expensive on MSRP at $1,689 MSRP versus $196 MSRP, and it gives you a 49.9% average FPS lead across 10 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-13400F is also 307.3% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 31.4 PassMark/$), 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 w7-2575X 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 22 cores / 44 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 w7-2575X Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Xeon w7-2575X
1080p
low	171 FPS	340 FPS
medium	158 FPS	312 FPS
high	132 FPS	253 FPS
ultra	112 FPS	213 FPS
1440p
low	143 FPS	288 FPS
medium	123 FPS	235 FPS
high	99 FPS	178 FPS
ultra	84 FPS	157 FPS
4K
low	81 FPS	198 FPS
medium	74 FPS	161 FPS
high	59 FPS	121 FPS
ultra	46 FPS	108 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Xeon w7-2575X

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Xeon w7-2575X
1080p
low	545 FPS	693 FPS
medium	464 FPS	586 FPS
high	389 FPS	461 FPS
ultra	356 FPS	407 FPS
1440p
low	458 FPS	557 FPS
medium	403 FPS	486 FPS
high	345 FPS	401 FPS
ultra	301 FPS	329 FPS
4K
low	280 FPS	328 FPS
medium	247 FPS	289 FPS
high	231 FPS	263 FPS
ultra	204 FPS	233 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Xeon w7-2575X

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Xeon w7-2575X
1080p
low	530 FPS	1025 FPS
medium	449 FPS	1252 FPS
high	415 FPS	1143 FPS
ultra	375 FPS	875 FPS
1440p
low	490 FPS	1025 FPS
medium	422 FPS	961 FPS
high	382 FPS	864 FPS
ultra	343 FPS	656 FPS
4K
low	393 FPS	660 FPS
medium	331 FPS	559 FPS
high	296 FPS	498 FPS
ultra	246 FPS	425 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Xeon w7-2575X

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Xeon w7-2575X
1080p
low	626 FPS	1252 FPS
medium	626 FPS	1015 FPS
high	626 FPS	951 FPS
ultra	626 FPS	827 FPS
1440p
low	626 FPS	969 FPS
medium	626 FPS	835 FPS
high	598 FPS	728 FPS
ultra	521 FPS	624 FPS
4K
low	535 FPS	716 FPS
medium	492 FPS	618 FPS
high	439 FPS	543 FPS
ultra	382 FPS	437 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Xeon w7-2575X

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and Xeon w7-2575X

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 w7-2575X

The Xeon w7-2575X 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 22 cores and 44 threads. Base frequency is 3 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): 250 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 52,951 points. Launch price was $1,689.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon w7-2575X offers 22 cores / 44 threads — the Xeon w7-2575X has 12 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 4.8 GHz on the Xeon w7-2575X — a 4.3% clock advantage for the Xeon w7-2575X (base: 2.5 GHz vs 3 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Xeon w7-2575X uses Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) (Intel 7 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Xeon w7-2575X's 52,951 — a 71.6% lead for the Xeon w7-2575X. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,407 vs 2,300, a 4.5% lead for the Core i5-13400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 11,408 vs 19,640 (53% advantage for the Xeon w7-2575X). L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 45 MB on the Xeon w7-2575X.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Xeon w7-2575X
Cores / Threads	10 / 16	22 / 44+120%
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz	4.8 GHz+4%
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	3 GHz+20%
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	52,951+112%
Cinebench R23 Multi	16,211	—
Geekbench 6 Single	2,407+5%	2,300
Geekbench 6 Multi	11,408	19,640+72%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-13400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon w7-2575X uses LGA4677 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 memory speed. The Xeon w7-2575X supports up to 2048 GB of RAM compared to 192 GB — 165.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-13400F) vs 4 (Xeon w7-2575X). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 64 (Xeon w7-2575X) — the Xeon w7-2575X offers 44 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-13400F) and Intel W790 (Xeon w7-2575X).

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Xeon w7-2575X
Socket	LGA1700	LGA4677
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200	DDR5-4800
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB	2048 GB+967%
RAM Channels	2	4+100%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	64+220%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Xeon w7-2575X has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Xeon w7-2575X supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F) vs true (Xeon w7-2575X). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600; Xeon w7-2575X rivals Threadripper PRO 7965WX.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Xeon w7-2575X
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	—	None
Unlocked	No	Yes
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	true
Target Use	Gaming	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the Xeon w7-2575X debuted at $1689. On MSRP ($196 vs $1689), the Core i5-13400F is $1493 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 31.4 pts/$ for the Xeon w7-2575X — making the Core i5-13400F the 121.2% better value option.