
Core i5-13600K
Popular choices:

Xeon E5-4669 v4
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 i5-13600K
2022Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +48.4% higher average FPS across 11 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $6,678 less on MSRP ($329 MSRP vs $7,007 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 4470.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 114.5 vs 2.5 PassMark/$ ($329 MSRP vs $7,007 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 125W instead of 135W, a 10W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA2011 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (24 MB vs 55 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-4669 v4, which brings 22 cores / 44 threads and 40 PCIe lanes.
Xeon E5-4669 v4
2016Why buy it
- ✅+129.2% larger total L3 cache (55 MB vs 24 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 22 cores / 44 threads, plus 40 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅100% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13600K across 11 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (17,547 vs 37,655).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 2.5 vs 114.5 PassMark/$ ($7,007 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
- ❌Older platform position on LGA2011 with DDR4, while Core i5-13600K moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i5-13600K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Core i5-13600K
2022Xeon E5-4669 v4
2016Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +48.4% higher average FPS across 11 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $6,678 less on MSRP ($329 MSRP vs $7,007 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 4470.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 114.5 vs 2.5 PassMark/$ ($329 MSRP vs $7,007 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 125W instead of 135W, a 10W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA2011 and DDR4.
Why buy it
- ✅+129.2% larger total L3 cache (55 MB vs 24 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 22 cores / 44 threads, plus 40 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅100% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (24 MB vs 55 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-4669 v4, which brings 22 cores / 44 threads and 40 PCIe lanes.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13600K across 11 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (17,547 vs 37,655).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 2.5 vs 114.5 PassMark/$ ($7,007 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
- ❌Older platform position on LGA2011 with DDR4, while Core i5-13600K moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i5-13600K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i5-13600K better than Xeon E5-4669 v4?
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 i5-13600K | Xeon E5-4669 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 281 FPS | 180 FPS |
| medium | 264 FPS | 157 FPS |
| high | 220 FPS | 124 FPS |
| ultra | 188 FPS | 99 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 235 FPS | 149 FPS |
| medium | 198 FPS | 125 FPS |
| high | 158 FPS | 95 FPS |
| ultra | 138 FPS | 77 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 159 FPS | 69 FPS |
| medium | 133 FPS | 61 FPS |
| high | 102 FPS | 47 FPS |
| ultra | 90 FPS | 38 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-13600K | Xeon E5-4669 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 632 FPS | 212 FPS |
| medium | 533 FPS | 192 FPS |
| high | 450 FPS | 164 FPS |
| ultra | 416 FPS | 133 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 540 FPS | 182 FPS |
| medium | 474 FPS | 166 FPS |
| high | 403 FPS | 144 FPS |
| ultra | 351 FPS | 112 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 316 FPS | 115 FPS |
| medium | 282 FPS | 105 FPS |
| high | 269 FPS | 93 FPS |
| ultra | 238 FPS | 75 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-13600K | Xeon E5-4669 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 663 FPS | 439 FPS |
| medium | 543 FPS | 439 FPS |
| high | 477 FPS | 439 FPS |
| ultra | 414 FPS | 413 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 600 FPS | 439 FPS |
| medium | 499 FPS | 439 FPS |
| high | 434 FPS | 391 FPS |
| ultra | 376 FPS | 350 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 441 FPS | 404 FPS |
| medium | 381 FPS | 325 FPS |
| high | 344 FPS | 289 FPS |
| ultra | 295 FPS | 240 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-13600K | Xeon E5-4669 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 941 FPS | 439 FPS |
| medium | 941 FPS | 439 FPS |
| high | 923 FPS | 439 FPS |
| ultra | 831 FPS | 439 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 941 FPS | 439 FPS |
| medium | 850 FPS | 439 FPS |
| high | 738 FPS | 439 FPS |
| ultra | 651 FPS | 439 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 651 FPS | 439 FPS |
| medium | 588 FPS | 439 FPS |
| high | 529 FPS | 408 FPS |
| ultra | 437 FPS | 350 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13600K and Xeon E5-4669 v4

Core i5-13600K
Core i5-13600K
The Core i5-13600K is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 27 September 2022 (3 years ago). It is based on the Raptor Lake, Raptor Cove, Gracemont (2022) architecture. It features 14 cores and 20 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 5.1 GHz. L3 cache: 24 MB. L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR4, DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 37,655 points. Launch price was $319.

Xeon E5-4669 v4
Xeon E5-4669 v4
The Xeon E5-4669 v4 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 June 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Broadwell (2015−2019) architecture. It features 22 cores and 44 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 55 MB. L2 cache: 5.5 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 135 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 17,547 points. Launch price was $7,007.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13600K packs 14 cores / 20 threads, while the Xeon E5-4669 v4 offers 22 cores / 44 threads — the Xeon E5-4669 v4 has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.1 GHz on the Core i5-13600K versus 3 GHz on the Xeon E5-4669 v4 — a 51.9% clock advantage for the Core i5-13600K (base: 3.5 GHz vs 2.2 GHz). The Core i5-13600K uses the Raptor Lake, Raptor Cove, Gracemont (2022) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Xeon E5-4669 v4 uses Broadwell (2015−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13600K scores 37,655 against the Xeon E5-4669 v4's 17,547 — a 72.9% lead for the Core i5-13600K. L3 cache: 24 MB on the Core i5-13600K vs 55 MB on the Xeon E5-4669 v4.
| Feature | Core i5-13600K | Xeon E5-4669 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 14 / 20 | 22 / 44+57% |
| Boost Clock | 5.1 GHz+70% | 3 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.5 GHz+59% | 2.2 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 24 MB | 55 MB+129% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB (per core) | 5.5 MB+175% |
| Process | Intel 7 nm-50% | 14 nm |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake, Raptor Cove, Gracemont (2022) | Broadwell (2015−2019) |
| PassMark | 37,655+115% | 17,547 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | — | 18,730 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 825 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 2,882 |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-13600K uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon E5-4669 v4 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-5600 on the Core i5-13600K versus DDR4-2400 on the Xeon E5-4669 v4 — the Core i5-13600K supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon E5-4669 v4 supports up to 1536 GB of RAM compared to 192 GB — 155.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-13600K) vs 4 (Xeon E5-4669 v4). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13600K) vs 40 (Xeon E5-4669 v4) — the Xeon E5-4669 v4 offers 20 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel 600 series,Intel 700 series (Core i5-13600K) and C610 (Xeon E5-4669 v4).
| Feature | Core i5-13600K | Xeon E5-4669 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | LGA2011 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+67% | PCIe 3.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-5600+25% | DDR4-2400 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 192 GB | 1536 GB+700% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 4+100% |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | 40+100% |
Advanced Features
Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13600K) vs Yes (Xeon E5-4669 v4). The Core i5-13600K includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 770), while the Xeon E5-4669 v4 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-13600K targets Desktop.
| Feature | Core i5-13600K | Xeon E5-4669 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | UHD Graphics 770 | — |
| Unlocked | Yes | — |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | Yes |
| Target Use | Desktop | — |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-13600K launched at $329 MSRP, while the Xeon E5-4669 v4 debuted at $7007. On MSRP ($329 vs $7007), the Core i5-13600K is $6678 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13600K delivers 114.5 pts/$ vs 2.5 pts/$ for the Xeon E5-4669 v4 — making the Core i5-13600K the 191.4% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-13600K | Xeon E5-4669 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $329-95% | $7007 |
| Performance per Dollar | 114.5+4480% | 2.5 |
| Release Date | 2022 | 2016 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













