Core i5-13400F vs FX-6120

CPU

GPU

Core i5-13400F

10 Cores16 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.6 GHz2023

Popular choices:

•••••••••

FX-6120

6 Cores6 Thrd95 WWMax: 4.2 GHz2012

Popular choices:

••••i5-13400F•••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i5-13400F

10 / 16

25,029

+549.6%

3,853

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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 i5-13400F

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +371.2% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+150% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 8 MB).
✅Delivers 523.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 20.5 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $188 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 95W, a 30W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of AM3+ and older memory support.

Trade-offs

❌
4.3% HIGHER MSRP
$196 MSRPvs$188 MSRP

FX-6120

2012

Why buy it

✅Costs $8 less on MSRP ($188 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (3,853 vs 25,029).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 20 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 20.5 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($188 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌46.2% higher power demand at 95W vs 65W.

Core i5-13400F

2023

FX-6120

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +371.2% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+150% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 8 MB).
✅Delivers 523.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 20.5 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $188 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 95W, a 30W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of AM3+ and older memory support.

Why buy it

✅Costs $8 less on MSRP ($188 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌
4.3% HIGHER MSRP
$196 MSRPvs$188 MSRP

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (3,853 vs 25,029).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 20 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 20.5 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($188 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌46.2% higher power demand at 95W vs 65W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-13400F better than FX-6120?

Yes. Core i5-13400F is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 371.2% average FPS lead across 3 shared CPU game tests in our data, 549.6% 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 371.2% more average FPS across 3 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 549.6% better PassMark, backed by 10 cores and 16 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 150% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 8 MB).

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

Core i5-13400F is the smarter buy today. Core i5-13400F is 4.3% more expensive on MSRP at $196 MSRP versus $188 MSRP, and it gives you a 371.2% average FPS lead across 3 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 523.1% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 20.5 PassMark/$), 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 i5-13400F is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2023 vs 2012), a healthier platform with LGA1700 and DDR5 instead of AM3+, 150% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 8 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 10 cores / 16 threads instead of 6/6. 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 i5-13400F Benchmark Check

FX-6120 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	FX-6120
1080p
low	171 FPS	96 FPS
medium	158 FPS	96 FPS
high	132 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	112 FPS	96 FPS
1440p
low	143 FPS	96 FPS
medium	123 FPS	96 FPS
high	99 FPS	94 FPS
ultra	84 FPS	78 FPS
4K
low	81 FPS	65 FPS
medium	74 FPS	57 FPS
high	59 FPS	45 FPS
ultra	46 FPS	36 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open FX-6120

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	FX-6120
1080p
low	545 FPS	96 FPS
medium	464 FPS	96 FPS
high	389 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	356 FPS	96 FPS
1440p
low	458 FPS	96 FPS
medium	403 FPS	96 FPS
high	345 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	301 FPS	96 FPS
4K
low	280 FPS	96 FPS
medium	247 FPS	96 FPS
high	231 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	204 FPS	96 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open FX-6120

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-13400F	FX-6120
1080p
low	530 FPS	96 FPS
medium	449 FPS	96 FPS
high	415 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	375 FPS	96 FPS
1440p
low	490 FPS	96 FPS
medium	422 FPS	96 FPS
high	382 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	343 FPS	96 FPS
4K
low	393 FPS	96 FPS
medium	331 FPS	96 FPS
high	296 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	246 FPS	96 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open FX-6120

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-13400F	FX-6120
1080p
low	626 FPS	96 FPS
medium	626 FPS	96 FPS
high	626 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	626 FPS	96 FPS
1440p
low	626 FPS	96 FPS
medium	626 FPS	96 FPS
high	598 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	521 FPS	96 FPS
4K
low	535 FPS	96 FPS
medium	492 FPS	96 FPS
high	439 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	382 FPS	96 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open FX-6120

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and FX-6120

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.

FX-6120

The FX-6120 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 23 October 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Zambezi (2011−2012) architecture. It features 6 cores and 6 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.2 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 6 MB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: AM3+. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,853 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the FX-6120 offers 6 cores / 6 threads — the Core i5-13400F has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 4.2 GHz on the FX-6120 — a 9.1% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 3.6 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the FX-6120 uses Zambezi (2011−2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the FX-6120's 3,853 — a 146.6% lead for the Core i5-13400F. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 8 MB (total) on the FX-6120.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	FX-6120
Cores / Threads	10 / 16+67%	6 / 6
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz+10%	4.2 GHz
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	3.6 GHz+44%
L3 Cache	20 MB (total)+150%	8 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)	6 MB+380%
Process	Intel 7 nm-78%	32 nm
Architecture	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)	Zambezi (2011−2012)
PassMark	25,029+550%	3,853
Cinebench R23 Multi	16,211	—
Geekbench 6 Single	2,407	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	11,408	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-13400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the FX-6120 uses AM3+ (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	FX-6120
Socket	LGA1700	AM3+
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+150%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200	—
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	20	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F) / not specified (FX-6120). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	FX-6120
Integrated GPU	No	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	—
Target Use	Gaming	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the FX-6120 debuted at $188. On MSRP ($196 vs $188), the FX-6120 is $8 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 20.5 pts/$ for the FX-6120 — making the Core i5-13400F the 144.7% better value option.