Core i9-13900E vs M3 Max 16-Core

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.

Core i9-13900E vs M3 Max 16-Core FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core i9-13900E vs M3 Max 16-Core: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core i9-13900E

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +33.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (40,476 vs 41,257).
❌Launch MSRP is still $554 MSRP, while M3 Max 16-Core mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

M3 Max 16-Core

2023

Why buy it

✅+1.9% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-13900E across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i9-13900E better than M3 Max 16-Core?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core i9-13900E is ahead with a 33.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, M3 Max 16-Core pulls ahead with 1.9% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, M3 Max 16-Core is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.9% better PassMark, backed by 16 cores and 16 threads.

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

Core i9-13900E is the better buy right now. Core i9-13900E comes in at an unclear MSRP at $554 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 33.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that M3 Max 16-Core is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 1.9% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (73.1 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper. That said, if you already own a compatible none + DDR5 setup, M3 Max 16-Core can still make sense as a platform-matched option because it avoids a motherboard and RAM swap.

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

M3 Max 16-Core is the safer long-term CPU choice because it gives you more room to grow and a better platform outlook.

Core i9-13900E vs M3 Max 16-Core Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core i9-13900E

The Core i9-13900E 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 24 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 5.2 GHz. L3 cache: 36 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4, DDR5 Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 40,476 points. Launch price was $499.

M3 Max 16-Core

The M3 Max 16-Core is manufactured by Apple. It was released in 30 October 2023 (2 years ago). It features 16 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 2.748 GHz, with boost up to 4.06 GHz. Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: none. Memory support: LPDDR5, LPDDR5X. Passmark benchmark score: 41,257 points. Launch price was $499.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i9-13900E packs 24 cores / 32 threads, while the M3 Max 16-Core offers 16 cores / 16 threads — the Core i9-13900E has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.2 GHz on the Core i9-13900E versus 4.06 GHz on the M3 Max 16-Core — a 24.6% clock advantage for the Core i9-13900E (base: 1.8 GHz vs 2.748 GHz). The Core i9-13900E is built on the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture. In PassMark, the Core i9-13900E scores 40,476 against the M3 Max 16-Core's 41,257 — a 1.9% lead for the M3 Max 16-Core.

Feature	Core i9-13900E	M3 Max 16-Core
Cores / Threads	24 / 32+50%	16 / 16
Boost Clock	5.2 GHz+28%	4.06 GHz
Base Clock	1.8 GHz	2.748 GHz+53%
L3 Cache	36 MB (total)	—
L2 Cache	2 MB (per core)	—
Process	10 nm	3 nm-70%
Architecture	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)	—
PassMark	40,476	41,257+2%
Geekbench 6 Single	2,606	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	15,000	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i9-13900E uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the M3 Max 16-Core uses none (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-5600 on the Core i9-13900E versus 6400 on the M3 Max 16-Core — the M3 Max 16-Core supports 14.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 128 GB of RAM. Memory channels: 2 (Core i9-13900E) vs 4 (M3 Max 16-Core). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i9-13900E) vs 0 (M3 Max 16-Core) — the Core i9-13900E offers 20 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: W680,Q670,Z790,H770 (Core i9-13900E) and Apple M3 (M3 Max 16-Core).

Feature	Core i9-13900E	M3 Max 16-Core
Socket	LGA1700	none
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-5600	6400+14%
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	128 GB
RAM Channels	2	4+100%
ECC Support	Yes	No
PCIe Lanes	20	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i9-13900E) vs VT-x, VT-d (macOS) (M3 Max 16-Core). Both include integrated graphics — Intel UHD Graphics 770 (Core i9-13900E) and Apple M3 Max GPU (40-core) (M3 Max 16-Core) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i9-13900E targets Embedded. Direct competitor: M3 Max 16-Core rivals Core i9-13950HX.

Feature	Core i9-13900E	M3 Max 16-Core
Integrated GPU	Yes	Yes
IGPU Model	Intel UHD Graphics 770	Apple M3 Max GPU (40-core)
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d (macOS)
Target Use	Embedded	—