
Core i5-13400F
Popular choices:

Xeon E5-2658A V3
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: +20.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $1,636 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $1,832 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 1472.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 8.1 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $1,832 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 105W, a 40W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA2011-3 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 30 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2658A V3, which brings 12 cores / 24 threads and 40 PCIe lanes.
- ❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.
Xeon E5-2658A V3
2015Why buy it
- ✅+50% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 20 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 12 cores / 24 threads, plus 40 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅100% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (14,879 vs 25,029).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 8.1 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($1,832 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌61.5% higher power demand at 105W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA2011-3 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
Core i5-13400F
2023Xeon E5-2658A V3
2015Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +20.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $1,636 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $1,832 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 1472.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 8.1 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $1,832 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 105W, a 40W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA2011-3 and DDR4.
Why buy it
- ✅+50% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 20 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 12 cores / 24 threads, plus 40 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅100% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 30 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2658A V3, which brings 12 cores / 24 threads and 40 PCIe lanes.
- ❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (14,879 vs 25,029).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 8.1 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($1,832 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌61.5% higher power demand at 105W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA2011-3 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i5-13400F better than Xeon E5-2658A V3?
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 E5-2658A V3 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 171 FPS | 160 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 138 FPS |
| high | 132 FPS | 112 FPS |
| ultra | 112 FPS | 92 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 143 FPS | 134 FPS |
| medium | 123 FPS | 113 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 89 FPS |
| ultra | 84 FPS | 72 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 81 FPS | 62 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 56 FPS |
| high | 59 FPS | 44 FPS |
| ultra | 46 FPS | 35 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Xeon E5-2658A V3 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 545 FPS | 193 FPS |
| medium | 464 FPS | 175 FPS |
| high | 389 FPS | 151 FPS |
| ultra | 356 FPS | 125 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 458 FPS | 167 FPS |
| medium | 403 FPS | 153 FPS |
| high | 345 FPS | 134 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 109 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 280 FPS | 109 FPS |
| medium | 247 FPS | 101 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 89 FPS |
| ultra | 204 FPS | 71 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Xeon E5-2658A V3 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 372 FPS |
| medium | 449 FPS | 372 FPS |
| high | 415 FPS | 372 FPS |
| ultra | 375 FPS | 366 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 490 FPS | 372 FPS |
| medium | 422 FPS | 372 FPS |
| high | 382 FPS | 372 FPS |
| ultra | 343 FPS | 330 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 393 FPS | 372 FPS |
| medium | 331 FPS | 316 FPS |
| high | 296 FPS | 281 FPS |
| ultra | 246 FPS | 232 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Xeon E5-2658A V3 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 372 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 372 FPS |
| high | 626 FPS | 372 FPS |
| ultra | 626 FPS | 372 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 372 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 372 FPS |
| high | 598 FPS | 372 FPS |
| ultra | 521 FPS | 372 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 535 FPS | 372 FPS |
| medium | 492 FPS | 372 FPS |
| high | 439 FPS | 372 FPS |
| ultra | 382 FPS | 324 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and Xeon E5-2658A V3

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 E5-2658A V3
Xeon E5-2658A V3
The Xeon E5-2658A V3 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Haswell-EP (2014−2015) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.9 GHz. L3 cache: 30 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011-3. Thermal design power (TDP): 105 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2133. Passmark benchmark score: 14,879 points. Launch price was $800.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon E5-2658A V3 offers 12 cores / 24 threads — the Xeon E5-2658A V3 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 2.9 GHz on the Xeon E5-2658A V3 — a 45.3% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2.2 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Xeon E5-2658A V3 uses Haswell-EP (2014−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Xeon E5-2658A V3's 14,879 — a 50.9% lead for the Core i5-13400F. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 30 MB (total) on the Xeon E5-2658A V3.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Xeon E5-2658A V3 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 10 / 16 | 12 / 24+20% |
| Boost Clock | 4.6 GHz+59% | 2.9 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz+14% | 2.2 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 20 MB (total) | 30 MB (total)+50% |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core)+400% | 256K (per core) |
| Process | Intel 7 nm-68% | 22 nm |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) | Haswell-EP (2014−2015) |
| PassMark | 25,029+68% | 14,879 |
| 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 E5-2658A V3 uses LGA2011-3 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-13400F versus DDR4-2133 on the Xeon E5-2658A V3 — the Core i5-13400F supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon E5-2658A V3 supports up to 768 GB of RAM compared to 192 GB — 120% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-13400F) vs 4 (Xeon E5-2658A V3). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 40 (Xeon E5-2658A V3) — the Xeon E5-2658A V3 offers 20 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Xeon E5-2658A V3 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | LGA2011-3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0 | PCIe 5.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200+25% | DDR4-2133 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 192 GB | 768 GB+300% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 4+100% |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | 40+100% |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the Xeon E5-2658A V3 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming, Xeon E5-2658A V3 targets Server. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Xeon E5-2658A V3 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d |
| Target Use | Gaming | Server |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the Xeon E5-2658A V3 debuted at $1832. On MSRP ($196 vs $1832), the Core i5-13400F is $1636 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 8.1 pts/$ for the Xeon E5-2658A V3 — making the Core i5-13400F the 176.1% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Xeon E5-2658A V3 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $196-89% | $1832 |
| Performance per Dollar | 127.7+1477% | 8.1 |
| Release Date | 2023 | 2015 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













