
Core i5-13400F
Popular choices:

Xeon D-2766NT
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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
2023Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +16.1% higher average FPS across 7 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 97W, a 32W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of FCBGA2579 and DDR4.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon D-2766NT.
Trade-offs
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon D-2766NT, which brings 14 cores / 28 threads.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $196 MSRP, while Xeon D-2766NT mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
Xeon D-2766NT
2022Why buy it
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 14 cores / 28 threads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 7 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (24,013 vs 25,029).
- ❌49.2% higher power demand at 97W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on FCBGA2579 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Core i5-13400F
2023Xeon D-2766NT
2022Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +16.1% higher average FPS across 7 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 97W, a 32W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of FCBGA2579 and DDR4.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon D-2766NT.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 14 cores / 28 threads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon D-2766NT, which brings 14 cores / 28 threads.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $196 MSRP, while Xeon D-2766NT mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 7 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (24,013 vs 25,029).
- ❌49.2% higher power demand at 97W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on FCBGA2579 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i5-13400F better than Xeon D-2766NT?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Games Benchmarks
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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Xeon D-2766NT |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 171 FPS | 181 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 149 FPS |
| high | 132 FPS | 120 FPS |
| ultra | 112 FPS | 95 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 143 FPS | 144 FPS |
| medium | 123 FPS | 115 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 90 FPS |
| ultra | 84 FPS | 71 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 81 FPS | 68 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 58 FPS |
| high | 59 FPS | 46 FPS |
| ultra | 46 FPS | 36 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Xeon D-2766NT |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 545 FPS | 212 FPS |
| medium | 464 FPS | 188 FPS |
| high | 389 FPS | 158 FPS |
| ultra | 356 FPS | 130 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 458 FPS | 182 FPS |
| medium | 403 FPS | 166 FPS |
| high | 345 FPS | 143 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 115 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 280 FPS | 117 FPS |
| medium | 247 FPS | 108 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 95 FPS |
| ultra | 204 FPS | 77 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Xeon D-2766NT |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 600 FPS |
| medium | 449 FPS | 582 FPS |
| high | 415 FPS | 505 FPS |
| ultra | 375 FPS | 442 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 490 FPS | 588 FPS |
| medium | 422 FPS | 479 FPS |
| high | 382 FPS | 416 FPS |
| ultra | 343 FPS | 363 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 393 FPS | 430 FPS |
| medium | 331 FPS | 334 FPS |
| high | 296 FPS | 286 FPS |
| ultra | 246 FPS | 230 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Xeon D-2766NT |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 600 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 600 FPS |
| high | 626 FPS | 600 FPS |
| ultra | 626 FPS | 548 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 600 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 574 FPS |
| high | 598 FPS | 493 FPS |
| ultra | 521 FPS | 419 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 535 FPS | 449 FPS |
| medium | 492 FPS | 403 FPS |
| high | 439 FPS | 358 FPS |
| ultra | 382 FPS | 309 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and Xeon D-2766NT

Core i5-13400F
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.

Xeon D-2766NT
Xeon D-2766NT
The Xeon D-2766NT is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It features 14 cores and 28 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 3.1 GHz. L3 cache: 20 MB. Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2579. Thermal design power (TDP): 97 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 24,013 points. Launch price was $800.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon D-2766NT offers 14 cores / 28 threads — the Xeon D-2766NT has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 3.1 GHz on the Xeon D-2766NT — a 39% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2 GHz). The Core i5-13400F is built on the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture. In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Xeon D-2766NT's 24,013 — a 4.1% lead for the Core i5-13400F. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 20 MB on the Xeon D-2766NT.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Xeon D-2766NT |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 10 / 16 | 14 / 28+40% |
| Boost Clock | 4.6 GHz+48% | 3.1 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz+25% | 2 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 20 MB (total) | 20 MB |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | — |
| Process | Intel 7 nm-30% | 10 nm |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) | — |
| PassMark | 25,029+4% | 24,013 |
| 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 Xeon D-2766NT uses FCBGA2579 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Xeon D-2766NT |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | FCBGA2579 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| 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 (Xeon D-2766NT). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Xeon D-2766NT |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | — |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | — |
| Target Use | Gaming | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













