
Core i5-13400F
Popular choices:

Xeon Phi 7290
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
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 245W, a 180W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA3647 and DDR4.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon Phi 7290.
Trade-offs
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon Phi 7290, which brings 72 cores / 288 threads.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $196 MSRP, while Xeon Phi 7290 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
Xeon Phi 7290
2016Why buy it
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 72 cores / 288 threads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (17,839 vs 25,029).
- ❌276.9% higher power demand at 245W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA3647 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Core i5-13400F
2023Xeon Phi 7290
2016Why buy it
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 245W, a 180W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA3647 and DDR4.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon Phi 7290.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 72 cores / 288 threads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon Phi 7290, which brings 72 cores / 288 threads.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $196 MSRP, while Xeon Phi 7290 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (17,839 vs 25,029).
- ❌276.9% higher power demand at 245W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA3647 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 Phi 7290?
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 Phi 7290 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 171 FPS | 177 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 143 FPS |
| high | 132 FPS | 113 FPS |
| ultra | 112 FPS | 88 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 143 FPS | 141 FPS |
| medium | 123 FPS | 111 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 87 FPS |
| ultra | 84 FPS | 68 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 81 FPS | 66 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 56 FPS |
| high | 59 FPS | 43 FPS |
| ultra | 46 FPS | 34 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Xeon Phi 7290 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 545 FPS | 136 FPS |
| medium | 464 FPS | 120 FPS |
| high | 389 FPS | 109 FPS |
| ultra | 356 FPS | 86 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 458 FPS | 120 FPS |
| medium | 403 FPS | 108 FPS |
| high | 345 FPS | 97 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 77 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 280 FPS | 87 FPS |
| medium | 247 FPS | 81 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 72 FPS |
| ultra | 204 FPS | 56 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Xeon Phi 7290 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 446 FPS |
| medium | 449 FPS | 446 FPS |
| high | 415 FPS | 446 FPS |
| ultra | 375 FPS | 446 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 490 FPS | 446 FPS |
| medium | 422 FPS | 434 FPS |
| high | 382 FPS | 374 FPS |
| ultra | 343 FPS | 326 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 393 FPS | 394 FPS |
| medium | 331 FPS | 306 FPS |
| high | 296 FPS | 259 FPS |
| ultra | 246 FPS | 209 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Xeon Phi 7290 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 446 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 446 FPS |
| high | 626 FPS | 446 FPS |
| ultra | 626 FPS | 446 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 446 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 446 FPS |
| high | 598 FPS | 446 FPS |
| ultra | 521 FPS | 420 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 535 FPS | 446 FPS |
| medium | 492 FPS | 405 FPS |
| high | 439 FPS | 361 FPS |
| ultra | 382 FPS | 310 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and Xeon Phi 7290

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 Phi 7290
Xeon Phi 7290
The Xeon Phi 7290 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Knights Landing (2016) architecture. It features 72 cores and 288 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 1.7 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 245 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 17,839 points. Launch price was $800.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon Phi 7290 offers 72 cores / 288 threads — the Xeon Phi 7290 has 62 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 1.7 GHz on the Xeon Phi 7290 — a 92.1% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 1.5 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Xeon Phi 7290 uses Knights Landing (2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Xeon Phi 7290's 17,839 — a 33.5% lead for the Core i5-13400F. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 0 kB (total) on the Xeon Phi 7290.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Xeon Phi 7290 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 10 / 16 | 72 / 288+620% |
| Boost Clock | 4.6 GHz+171% | 1.7 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz+67% | 1.5 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 20 MB (total) | 0 kB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core)+150% | 512 kB (per core) |
| Process | Intel 7 nm-50% | 14 nm |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) | Knights Landing (2016) |
| PassMark | 25,029+40% | 17,839 |
| 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 Phi 7290 uses LGA3647 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Xeon Phi 7290 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | LGA3647 |
| 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 Phi 7290). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Xeon Phi 7290 |
|---|---|---|
| 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.













