A12-9800 vs Core i5-13400F

CPU

GPU

A12-9800

4 Cores4 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.2 GHz2017

Popular choices:

••••i5-13400F•••••

Core i5-13400F

10 Cores16 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.6 GHz2023

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

A12-9800

4 / 4

3,695

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i5-13400F

10 / 16

25,029

+577.4%

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.

A12-9800

2017

Why buy it

✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon R7, while Core i5-13400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (3,695 vs 25,029).
❌Older platform position on AM4 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.

Core i5-13400F

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +164.7% higher average FPS across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of AM4 and DDR4.
✅150% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $196 MSRP, while A12-9800 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while A12-9800 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

A12-9800

2017

Core i5-13400F

2023

Why buy it

✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon R7, while Core i5-13400F needs a discrete GPU.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +164.7% higher average FPS across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of AM4 and DDR4.
✅150% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (3,695 vs 25,029).
❌Older platform position on AM4 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $196 MSRP, while A12-9800 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while A12-9800 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-13400F better than A12-9800?

Yes. Core i5-13400F is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 164.7% average FPS lead across 2 shared CPU game tests in our data, 577.4% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i5-13400F is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 164.7% more average FPS across 2 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i5-13400F is the better fit. You are getting 577.4% better PassMark, backed by 10 cores and 16 threads.

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

Core i5-13400F is the smarter buy today. Core i5-13400F is at an unclear MSRP at $196 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it gives you a 164.7% average FPS lead across 2 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper. That said, if you already own a compatible AM4 + DDR4 setup, A12-9800 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?

Core i5-13400F is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2023 vs 2017), a healthier platform with LGA1700 and DDR5 instead of AM4, and more multi-core headroom with 10 cores / 16 threads instead of 4/4. 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.

A12-9800 Benchmark Check

Core i5-13400F Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	A12-9800	Core i5-13400F
1080p
low	92 FPS	171 FPS
medium	92 FPS	158 FPS
high	92 FPS	132 FPS
ultra	92 FPS	112 FPS
1440p
low	92 FPS	143 FPS
medium	92 FPS	123 FPS
high	92 FPS	99 FPS
ultra	76 FPS	84 FPS
4K
low	65 FPS	81 FPS
medium	58 FPS	74 FPS
high	45 FPS	59 FPS
ultra	36 FPS	46 FPS

Open A12-9800 Open Core i5-13400F

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	A12-9800	Core i5-13400F
1080p
low	92 FPS	545 FPS
medium	92 FPS	464 FPS
high	92 FPS	389 FPS
ultra	92 FPS	356 FPS
1440p
low	92 FPS	458 FPS
medium	92 FPS	403 FPS
high	92 FPS	345 FPS
ultra	92 FPS	301 FPS
4K
low	92 FPS	280 FPS
medium	92 FPS	247 FPS
high	92 FPS	231 FPS
ultra	92 FPS	204 FPS

Open A12-9800 Open Core i5-13400F

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	A12-9800	Core i5-13400F
1080p
low	92 FPS	530 FPS
medium	92 FPS	449 FPS
high	92 FPS	415 FPS
ultra	92 FPS	375 FPS
1440p
low	92 FPS	490 FPS
medium	92 FPS	422 FPS
high	92 FPS	382 FPS
ultra	92 FPS	343 FPS
4K
low	92 FPS	393 FPS
medium	92 FPS	331 FPS
high	92 FPS	296 FPS
ultra	92 FPS	246 FPS

Open A12-9800 Open Core i5-13400F

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	A12-9800	Core i5-13400F
1080p
low	92 FPS	626 FPS
medium	92 FPS	626 FPS
high	92 FPS	626 FPS
ultra	92 FPS	626 FPS
1440p
low	92 FPS	626 FPS
medium	92 FPS	626 FPS
high	92 FPS	598 FPS
ultra	92 FPS	521 FPS
4K
low	92 FPS	535 FPS
medium	92 FPS	492 FPS
high	92 FPS	439 FPS
ultra	92 FPS	382 FPS

Open A12-9800 Open Core i5-13400F

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of A12-9800 and Core i5-13400F

A12-9800

The A12-9800 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 27 July 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 4.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 3,695 points. Launch price was $139.

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.

⚡

Processing Power

The A12-9800 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i5-13400F offers 10 cores / 16 threads — the Core i5-13400F has 6 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.2 GHz on the A12-9800 versus 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F — a 9.1% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 3.8 GHz vs 2.5 GHz). The A12-9800 uses the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture (28 nm), while the Core i5-13400F uses Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) (Intel 7 nm). In PassMark, the A12-9800 scores 3,695 against the Core i5-13400F's 25,029 — a 148.5% lead for the Core i5-13400F. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 635 vs 2,407, a 116.5% lead for the Core i5-13400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A12-9800 vs 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F.

Feature	A12-9800	Core i5-13400F
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	10 / 16+150%
Boost Clock	4.2 GHz	4.6 GHz+10%
Base Clock	3.8 GHz+52%	2.5 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	20 MB (total)
L2 Cache	2048 kB+60%	1.25 MB (per core)
Process	28 nm	Intel 7 nm-75%
Architecture	Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)
PassMark	3,695	25,029+577%
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	16,211
Geekbench 6 Single	635	2,407+279%
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	11,408

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A12-9800 uses the AM4 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i5-13400F uses LGA1700 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2400 on the A12-9800 versus DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-13400F — the Core i5-13400F supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i5-13400F supports up to 192 GB of RAM compared to 64 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 8 (A12-9800) vs 20 (Core i5-13400F) — the Core i5-13400F offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: A320,B350,X370 (A12-9800) and H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-13400F).

Feature	A12-9800	Core i5-13400F
Socket	AM4	LGA1700
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 5.0+67%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2400	DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200+25%
Max RAM Capacity	64 GB	192 GB+200%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	8	20+150%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A12-9800) vs VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F). The A12-9800 includes integrated graphics (Radeon R7), while the Core i5-13400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A12-9800 targets Budget, Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: A12-9800 rivals Pentium G4600; Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.