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

✅Better for gaming: +25.7% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $30 less on MSRP ($329 MSRP vs $359 MSRP).
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 770, while Core i7-13700F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (37,655 vs 38,212).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (24 MB vs 30 MB).
❌92.3% higher power demand at 125W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i7-13700F.

Core i7-13700F

2023

Why buy it

✅+1.5% higher PassMark.
✅+25% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 24 MB).
✅Draws 65W instead of 125W, a 60W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes (Intel Laminar RM1)), unlike Core i5-13600K.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13600K across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌
9.1% HIGHER MSRP
$359 MSRPvs$329 MSRP
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i5-13600K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i5-13600K

2022

Core i7-13700F

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +25.7% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $30 less on MSRP ($329 MSRP vs $359 MSRP).
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 770, while Core i7-13700F needs a discrete GPU.

Why buy it

✅+1.5% higher PassMark.
✅+25% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 24 MB).
✅Draws 65W instead of 125W, a 60W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes (Intel Laminar RM1)), unlike Core i5-13600K.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (37,655 vs 38,212).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (24 MB vs 30 MB).
❌92.3% higher power demand at 125W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i7-13700F.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13600K across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌
9.1% HIGHER MSRP
$359 MSRPvs$329 MSRP
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i5-13600K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-13700F better than Core i5-13600K?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, Core i5-13600K is ahead with a 25.7% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i7-13700F pulls ahead with 1.5% better PassMark. Core i7-13700F also has the bigger cache pool with 25% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 24 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i7-13700F is the better fit. You are getting 1.5% better PassMark, backed by 16 cores and 24 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 25% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 24 MB).

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

Core i7-13700F is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-13600K makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Core i7-13700F is 9.1% more expensive on MSRP at $359 MSRP versus $329 MSRP, and it gives you 1.5% better PassMark. The trade-off is that Core i5-13600K is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 25.7% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-13600K is also 7.5% better value on MSRP (114.5 vs 106.4 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

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

Core i7-13700F is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2023 vs 2022), 25% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 24 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 16 cores / 24 threads instead of 14/20. That extra compute headroom should age better as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

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

Core i7-13700F Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-13600K	Core i7-13700F
1080p
low	281 FPS	264 FPS
medium	264 FPS	254 FPS
high	220 FPS	210 FPS
ultra	188 FPS	181 FPS
1440p
low	235 FPS	225 FPS
medium	198 FPS	193 FPS
high	158 FPS	153 FPS
ultra	138 FPS	135 FPS
4K
low	159 FPS	154 FPS
medium	133 FPS	131 FPS
high	102 FPS	101 FPS
ultra	90 FPS	90 FPS

Open Core i5-13600K Open Core i7-13700F

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-13600K	Core i7-13700F
1080p
low	632 FPS	343 FPS
medium	533 FPS	293 FPS
high	450 FPS	247 FPS
ultra	416 FPS	225 FPS
1440p
low	540 FPS	298 FPS
medium	474 FPS	264 FPS
high	403 FPS	224 FPS
ultra	351 FPS	192 FPS
4K
low	316 FPS	176 FPS
medium	282 FPS	160 FPS
high	269 FPS	152 FPS
ultra	238 FPS	133 FPS

Open Core i5-13600K Open Core i7-13700F

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-13600K	Core i7-13700F
1080p
low	663 FPS	647 FPS
medium	543 FPS	530 FPS
high	477 FPS	467 FPS
ultra	414 FPS	405 FPS
1440p
low	600 FPS	590 FPS
medium	499 FPS	491 FPS
high	434 FPS	427 FPS
ultra	376 FPS	370 FPS
4K
low	441 FPS	433 FPS
medium	381 FPS	373 FPS
high	344 FPS	338 FPS
ultra	295 FPS	289 FPS

Open Core i5-13600K Open Core i7-13700F

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-13600K	Core i7-13700F
1080p
low	941 FPS	936 FPS
medium	941 FPS	851 FPS
high	923 FPS	735 FPS
ultra	831 FPS	660 FPS
1440p
low	941 FPS	799 FPS
medium	850 FPS	712 FPS
high	738 FPS	615 FPS
ultra	651 FPS	542 FPS
4K
low	651 FPS	548 FPS
medium	588 FPS	497 FPS
high	529 FPS	444 FPS
ultra	437 FPS	388 FPS

Open Core i5-13600K Open Core i7-13700F

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13600K and Core i7-13700F

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.

Core i7-13700F

The Core i7-13700F 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 16 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 5.2 GHz. L3 cache: 30 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-5600, DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 38,212 points. Launch price was $359.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13600K packs 14 cores / 20 threads, while the Core i7-13700F offers 16 cores / 24 threads — the Core i7-13700F has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.1 GHz on the Core i5-13600K versus 5.2 GHz on the Core i7-13700F — a 1.9% clock advantage for the Core i7-13700F (base: 3.5 GHz vs 2.1 GHz). The Core i5-13600K uses the Raptor Lake, Raptor Cove, Gracemont (2022) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Core i7-13700F uses Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) (Intel 7 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13600K scores 37,655 against the Core i7-13700F's 38,212 — a 1.5% lead for the Core i7-13700F. L3 cache: 24 MB on the Core i5-13600K vs 30 MB (total) on the Core i7-13700F.

Feature	Core i5-13600K	Core i7-13700F
Cores / Threads	14 / 20	16 / 24+14%
Boost Clock	5.1 GHz	5.2 GHz+2%
Base Clock	3.5 GHz+67%	2.1 GHz
L3 Cache	24 MB	30 MB (total)+25%
L2 Cache	2 MB (per core)	2 MB (per core)
Process	Intel 7 nm	Intel 7 nm
Architecture	Raptor Lake, Raptor Cove, Gracemont (2022)	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)
PassMark	37,655	38,212+1%
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	24,775
Geekbench 6 Single	—	2,676
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	14,254

🧠

Memory & Platform

Both processors use the LGA1700 socket with PCIe 5.0. Both support up to DDR5-5600 memory speed. Both support up to 192 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 20 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: Intel 600 series,Intel 700 series (Core i5-13600K) and H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i7-13700F).

Feature	Core i5-13600K	Core i7-13700F
Socket	LGA1700	LGA1700
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-5600	DDR5-5600, DDR4-3200
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB	192 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	Yes	No
PCIe Lanes	20	20

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Core i5-13600K has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13600K) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i7-13700F). The Core i5-13600K includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 770), while the Core i7-13700F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-13600K targets Desktop, Core i7-13700F targets High-end Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i7-13700F rivals Ryzen 7 7700X.

Feature	Core i5-13600K	Core i7-13700F
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	UHD Graphics 770	—
Unlocked	Yes	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	Desktop	High-end Gaming

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-13600K launched at $329 MSRP, while the Core i7-13700F debuted at $359. On MSRP ($329 vs $359), the Core i5-13600K is $30 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13600K delivers 114.5 pts/$ vs 106.4 pts/$ for the Core i7-13700F — making the Core i5-13600K the 7.3% better value option.