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

✅+140.7% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
✅Costs $2,506 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $2,702 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1329.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 8.9 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $2,702 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 200W, a 135W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA2011-3 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (11,408 vs 12,000).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 50 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2679 v4, which brings 20 cores / 40 threads and 40 PCIe lanes.

Xeon E5-2679 v4

2016

Why buy it

✅+5.2% higher Geekbench multi-core.
✅+150% larger total L3 cache (50 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 20 cores / 40 threads, plus 40 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅100% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (1,000 vs 2,407).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 8.9 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($2,702 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌207.7% higher power demand at 200W vs 65W.
❌Older platform position on LGA2011-3 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Core i5-13400F

2023

Xeon E5-2679 v4

2016

Why buy it

✅+140.7% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
✅Costs $2,506 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $2,702 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1329.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 8.9 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $2,702 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 200W, a 135W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA2011-3 and DDR4.

Why buy it

✅+5.2% higher Geekbench multi-core.
✅+150% larger total L3 cache (50 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 20 cores / 40 threads, plus 40 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅100% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (11,408 vs 12,000).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 50 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2679 v4, which brings 20 cores / 40 threads and 40 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (1,000 vs 2,407).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 8.9 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($2,702 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌207.7% higher power demand at 200W vs 65W.
❌Older platform position on LGA2011-3 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 E5-2679 v4?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon E5-2679 v4 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i5-13400F is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon E5-2679 v4 is the better fit. You are getting 5.2% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 20 cores and 40 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 150% larger total L3 cache (50 MB vs 20 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 $2,506 cheaper on MSRP at $196 MSRP versus $2,702 MSRP, and it gives you a 2.9% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that Xeon E5-2679 v4 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 5.2% better Geekbench multi-core. It is also 1329.9% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 8.9 PassMark/$), 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 2016) and a healthier platform with LGA1700 and DDR5 instead of LGA2011-3. 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

Xeon E5-2679 v4 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Xeon E5-2679 v4
1080p
low	171 FPS	182 FPS
medium	158 FPS	160 FPS
high	132 FPS	126 FPS
ultra	112 FPS	100 FPS
1440p
low	143 FPS	151 FPS
medium	123 FPS	127 FPS
high	99 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	84 FPS	78 FPS
4K
low	81 FPS	70 FPS
medium	74 FPS	62 FPS
high	59 FPS	48 FPS
ultra	46 FPS	39 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Xeon E5-2679 v4

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Xeon E5-2679 v4
1080p
low	545 FPS	364 FPS
medium	464 FPS	331 FPS
high	389 FPS	279 FPS
ultra	356 FPS	224 FPS
1440p
low	458 FPS	313 FPS
medium	403 FPS	284 FPS
high	345 FPS	242 FPS
ultra	301 FPS	188 FPS
4K
low	280 FPS	195 FPS
medium	247 FPS	178 FPS
high	231 FPS	153 FPS
ultra	204 FPS	120 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Xeon E5-2679 v4

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Xeon E5-2679 v4
1080p
low	530 FPS	603 FPS
medium	449 FPS	603 FPS
high	415 FPS	603 FPS
ultra	375 FPS	603 FPS
1440p
low	490 FPS	603 FPS
medium	422 FPS	590 FPS
high	382 FPS	559 FPS
ultra	343 FPS	505 FPS
4K
low	393 FPS	447 FPS
medium	331 FPS	363 FPS
high	296 FPS	328 FPS
ultra	246 FPS	274 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Xeon E5-2679 v4

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Xeon E5-2679 v4
1080p
low	626 FPS	603 FPS
medium	626 FPS	603 FPS
high	626 FPS	603 FPS
ultra	626 FPS	585 FPS
1440p
low	626 FPS	603 FPS
medium	626 FPS	603 FPS
high	598 FPS	545 FPS
ultra	521 FPS	462 FPS
4K
low	535 FPS	527 FPS
medium	492 FPS	472 FPS
high	439 FPS	418 FPS
ultra	382 FPS	359 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Xeon E5-2679 v4

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and Xeon E5-2679 v4

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 E5-2679 v4

The Xeon E5-2679 v4 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Broadwell (2015−2019) architecture. It features 20 cores and 40 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.3 GHz. L3 cache: 50 MB. L2 cache: 5 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011-3. Thermal design power (TDP): 200 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133, DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 24,131 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon E5-2679 v4 offers 20 cores / 40 threads — the Xeon E5-2679 v4 has 10 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 3.3 GHz on the Xeon E5-2679 v4 — a 32.9% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2.5 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Xeon E5-2679 v4 uses Broadwell (2015−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Xeon E5-2679 v4's 24,131 — a 3.7% lead for the Core i5-13400F. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,407 vs 1,000, a 82.6% lead for the Core i5-13400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 11,408 vs 12,000 (5.1% advantage for the Xeon E5-2679 v4). L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 50 MB on the Xeon E5-2679 v4.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Xeon E5-2679 v4
Cores / Threads	10 / 16	20 / 40+100%
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz+39%	3.3 GHz
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	2.5 GHz
L3 Cache	20 MB (total)	50 MB+150%
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)	5 MB+300%
Process	Intel 7 nm-50%	14 nm
Architecture	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)	Broadwell (2015−2019)
PassMark	25,029+4%	24,131
Cinebench R23 Multi	16,211	—
Geekbench 6 Single	2,407+141%	1,000
Geekbench 6 Multi	11,408	12,000+5%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-13400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon E5-2679 v4 uses LGA2011-3 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-13400F versus DDR4-2400 on the Xeon E5-2679 v4 — the Core i5-13400F supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon E5-2679 v4 supports up to 1536 GB of RAM compared to 192 GB — 155.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-13400F) vs 4 (Xeon E5-2679 v4). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 40 (Xeon E5-2679 v4) — the Xeon E5-2679 v4 offers 20 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-13400F) and C612,X99 (Xeon E5-2679 v4).

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Xeon E5-2679 v4
Socket	LGA1700	LGA2011-3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+67%	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200+25%	DDR4-2400
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB	1536 GB+700%
RAM Channels	2	4+100%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	40+100%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F) vs Yes (Xeon E5-2679 v4). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Xeon E5-2679 v4
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	Yes
Target Use	Gaming	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the Xeon E5-2679 v4 debuted at $2702. On MSRP ($196 vs $2702), the Core i5-13400F is $2506 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 8.9 pts/$ for the Xeon E5-2679 v4 — making the Core i5-13400F the 173.9% better value option.