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

2022

Why buy it

✅Costs $4,673 less on MSRP ($329 MSRP vs $5,002 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1909.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 114.5 vs 5.7 PassMark/$ ($329 MSRP vs $5,002 MSRP).
✅Draws 125W instead of 205W, a 80W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA3647 and DDR4.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 770, while Xeon W-3245M needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3245M, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Xeon W-3245M

2019

Why buy it

✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅220% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (28,494 vs 37,655).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 5.7 vs 114.5 PassMark/$ ($5,002 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
❌64% higher power demand at 205W vs 125W.
❌Older platform position on LGA3647 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

2022

Xeon W-3245M

2019

Why buy it

✅Costs $4,673 less on MSRP ($329 MSRP vs $5,002 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1909.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 114.5 vs 5.7 PassMark/$ ($329 MSRP vs $5,002 MSRP).
✅Draws 125W instead of 205W, a 80W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA3647 and DDR4.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 770, while Xeon W-3245M needs a discrete GPU.

Why buy it

✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅220% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.

Trade-offs

❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3245M, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (28,494 vs 37,655).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 5.7 vs 114.5 PassMark/$ ($5,002 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
❌64% higher power demand at 205W vs 125W.
❌Older platform position on LGA3647 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 W-3245M?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon W-3245M makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i5-13600K 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 i5-13600K is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 2.0% 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, Core i5-13600K is the better fit. You are getting 32.2% better PassMark, backed by 14 cores and 20 threads.

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

Core i5-13600K is the smarter buy today. Core i5-13600K is $4,673 cheaper on MSRP at $329 MSRP versus $5,002 MSRP, and it gives you a 2.0% average FPS lead across 10 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 1909.2% better value on MSRP (114.5 vs 5.7 PassMark/$), 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 i5-13600K is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2022 vs 2019), a healthier platform with LGA1700 and DDR5 instead of LGA3647, and more multi-core headroom with 14 cores / 20 threads instead of 16/32. 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 i5-13600K Benchmark Check

Xeon W-3245M Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-13600K	Xeon W-3245M
1080p
low	281 FPS	185 FPS
medium	264 FPS	150 FPS
high	220 FPS	123 FPS
ultra	188 FPS	98 FPS
1440p
low	235 FPS	148 FPS
medium	198 FPS	117 FPS
high	158 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	138 FPS	78 FPS
4K
low	159 FPS	82 FPS
medium	133 FPS	70 FPS
high	102 FPS	56 FPS
ultra	90 FPS	44 FPS

Open Core i5-13600K Open Xeon W-3245M

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-13600K	Xeon W-3245M
1080p
low	632 FPS	531 FPS
medium	533 FPS	447 FPS
high	450 FPS	372 FPS
ultra	416 FPS	335 FPS
1440p
low	540 FPS	461 FPS
medium	474 FPS	399 FPS
high	403 FPS	336 FPS
ultra	351 FPS	290 FPS
4K
low	316 FPS	287 FPS
medium	282 FPS	248 FPS
high	269 FPS	228 FPS
ultra	238 FPS	199 FPS

Open Core i5-13600K Open Xeon W-3245M

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-13600K	Xeon W-3245M
1080p
low	663 FPS	712 FPS
medium	543 FPS	712 FPS
high	477 FPS	712 FPS
ultra	414 FPS	712 FPS
1440p
low	600 FPS	712 FPS
medium	499 FPS	712 FPS
high	434 FPS	677 FPS
ultra	376 FPS	603 FPS
4K
low	441 FPS	524 FPS
medium	381 FPS	428 FPS
high	344 FPS	387 FPS
ultra	295 FPS	314 FPS

Open Core i5-13600K Open Xeon W-3245M

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-13600K	Xeon W-3245M
1080p
low	941 FPS	712 FPS
medium	941 FPS	712 FPS
high	923 FPS	712 FPS
ultra	831 FPS	712 FPS
1440p
low	941 FPS	712 FPS
medium	850 FPS	712 FPS
high	738 FPS	696 FPS
ultra	651 FPS	601 FPS
4K
low	651 FPS	646 FPS
medium	588 FPS	566 FPS
high	529 FPS	504 FPS
ultra	437 FPS	437 FPS

Open Core i5-13600K Open Xeon W-3245M

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13600K and Xeon W-3245M

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 W-3245M

The Xeon W-3245M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 June 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Cascade Lake (2019−2020) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 4.6 GHz. L3 cache: 22 MB. L2 cache: 16 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 205 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2933. Passmark benchmark score: 28,494 points. Launch price was $5,002.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13600K packs 14 cores / 20 threads, while the Xeon W-3245M offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the Xeon W-3245M has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.1 GHz on the Core i5-13600K versus 4.6 GHz on the Xeon W-3245M — a 10.3% clock advantage for the Core i5-13600K (base: 3.5 GHz vs 3.2 GHz). The Core i5-13600K uses the Raptor Lake, Raptor Cove, Gracemont (2022) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Xeon W-3245M uses Cascade Lake (2019−2020) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13600K scores 37,655 against the Xeon W-3245M's 28,494 — a 27.7% lead for the Core i5-13600K. L3 cache: 24 MB on the Core i5-13600K vs 22 MB on the Xeon W-3245M.

Feature	Core i5-13600K	Xeon W-3245M
Cores / Threads	14 / 20	16 / 32+14%
Boost Clock	5.1 GHz+11%	4.6 GHz
Base Clock	3.5 GHz+9%	3.2 GHz
L3 Cache	24 MB+9%	22 MB
L2 Cache	2 MB (per core)	16 MB+700%
Process	Intel 7 nm-50%	14 nm
Architecture	Raptor Lake, Raptor Cove, Gracemont (2022)	Cascade Lake (2019−2020)
PassMark	37,655+32%	28,494
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	18,500
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,474
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	11,572

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-13600K uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon W-3245M uses LGA3647 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-5600 on the Core i5-13600K versus DDR4-2933 on the Xeon W-3245M — the Core i5-13600K supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon W-3245M supports up to 2048 GB of RAM compared to 192 GB — 165.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-13600K) vs 6 (Xeon W-3245M). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13600K) vs 64 (Xeon W-3245M) — the Xeon W-3245M offers 44 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel 600 series,Intel 700 series (Core i5-13600K) and C621 (Xeon W-3245M).

Feature	Core i5-13600K	Xeon W-3245M
Socket	LGA1700	LGA3647
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+67%	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-5600+25%	DDR4-2933
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB	2048 GB+967%
RAM Channels	2	6+200%
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	64+220%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Core i5-13600K has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Xeon W-3245M supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13600K) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon W-3245M). The Core i5-13600K includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 770), while the Xeon W-3245M requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-13600K targets Desktop, Xeon W-3245M targets Professional Workstation / Mac Pro. Direct competitor: Xeon W-3245M rivals Xeon Gold 6242.

Feature	Core i5-13600K	Xeon W-3245M
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	UHD Graphics 770	—
Unlocked	Yes	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	Desktop	Professional Workstation / Mac Pro

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-13600K launched at $329 MSRP, while the Xeon W-3245M debuted at $5002. On MSRP ($329 vs $5002), the Core i5-13600K is $4673 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13600K delivers 114.5 pts/$ vs 5.7 pts/$ for the Xeon W-3245M — making the Core i5-13600K the 181% better value option.