
Core i5-13400F
Popular choices:

Xeon E5-2673 v2
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: +54.0% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 110W, a 45W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA2011 and older memory support.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon E5-2673 v2.
Trade-offs
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 25 MB).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $196 MSRP, while Xeon E5-2673 v2 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
Xeon E5-2673 v2
2013Why buy it
- ✅+25% larger total L3 cache (25 MB vs 20 MB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (12,331 vs 25,029).
- ❌69.2% higher power demand at 110W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA2011, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Core i5-13400F
2023Xeon E5-2673 v2
2013Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +54.0% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 110W, a 45W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA2011 and older memory support.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon E5-2673 v2.
Why buy it
- ✅+25% larger total L3 cache (25 MB vs 20 MB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 25 MB).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $196 MSRP, while Xeon E5-2673 v2 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (12,331 vs 25,029).
- ❌69.2% higher power demand at 110W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA2011, 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 E5-2673 v2?
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 E5-2673 v2 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 171 FPS | 179 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 143 FPS |
| high | 132 FPS | 118 FPS |
| ultra | 112 FPS | 93 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 143 FPS | 145 FPS |
| medium | 123 FPS | 114 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 91 FPS |
| ultra | 84 FPS | 72 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 81 FPS | 67 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 56 FPS |
| high | 59 FPS | 44 FPS |
| ultra | 46 FPS | 35 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Xeon E5-2673 v2 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 545 FPS | 308 FPS |
| medium | 464 FPS | 308 FPS |
| high | 389 FPS | 292 FPS |
| ultra | 356 FPS | 245 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 458 FPS | 308 FPS |
| medium | 403 FPS | 308 FPS |
| high | 345 FPS | 260 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 217 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 280 FPS | 226 FPS |
| medium | 247 FPS | 201 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 181 FPS |
| ultra | 204 FPS | 148 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Xeon E5-2673 v2 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 308 FPS |
| medium | 449 FPS | 308 FPS |
| high | 415 FPS | 308 FPS |
| ultra | 375 FPS | 308 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 490 FPS | 308 FPS |
| medium | 422 FPS | 308 FPS |
| high | 382 FPS | 308 FPS |
| ultra | 343 FPS | 308 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 393 FPS | 308 FPS |
| medium | 331 FPS | 308 FPS |
| high | 296 FPS | 302 FPS |
| ultra | 246 FPS | 243 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Xeon E5-2673 v2 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 308 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 308 FPS |
| high | 626 FPS | 308 FPS |
| ultra | 626 FPS | 308 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 308 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 308 FPS |
| high | 598 FPS | 308 FPS |
| ultra | 521 FPS | 308 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 535 FPS | 308 FPS |
| medium | 492 FPS | 308 FPS |
| high | 439 FPS | 308 FPS |
| ultra | 382 FPS | 308 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and Xeon E5-2673 v2

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 E5-2673 v2
Xeon E5-2673 v2
The Xeon E5-2673 v2 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.3 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 25 MB. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 110 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-800, DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333, DDR3-1600, DDR3-1866. Passmark benchmark score: 12,331 points. Launch price was $800.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon E5-2673 v2 offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Core i5-13400F has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 4 GHz on the Xeon E5-2673 v2 — a 14% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 3.3 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 E5-2673 v2's 12,331 — a 68% lead for the Core i5-13400F. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 25 MB on the Xeon E5-2673 v2.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Xeon E5-2673 v2 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 10 / 16+25% | 8 / 16 |
| Boost Clock | 4.6 GHz+15% | 4 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz | 3.3 GHz+32% |
| L3 Cache | 20 MB (total) | 25 MB+25% |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | — |
| Process | Intel 7 nm-68% | 22 nm |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) | — |
| PassMark | 25,029+103% | 12,331 |
| 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 E5-2673 v2 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Xeon E5-2673 v2 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | LGA2011 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+67% | PCIe 3.0 |
| 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 E5-2673 v2). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Xeon E5-2673 v2 |
|---|---|---|
| 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.













