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

✅Costs $4,755 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $4,951 MSRP).
✅Delivers 969.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 11.9 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $4,951 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 270W, a 205W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA4189 and DDR4.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon W-3375.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon W-3375 across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (11,408 vs 17,713).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 57 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3375, which brings 38 cores / 76 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.

Xeon W-3375

2021

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +24.0% higher average FPS across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+185% larger total L3 cache (57 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 38 cores / 76 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅220% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 11.9 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($4,951 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌315.4% higher power demand at 270W vs 65W.
❌Older platform position on LGA4189 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Core i5-13400F

2023

Xeon W-3375

2021

Why buy it

✅Costs $4,755 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $4,951 MSRP).
✅Delivers 969.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 11.9 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $4,951 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 270W, a 205W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA4189 and DDR4.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon W-3375.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +24.0% higher average FPS across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+185% larger total L3 cache (57 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 38 cores / 76 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅220% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon W-3375 across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (11,408 vs 17,713).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 57 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3375, which brings 38 cores / 76 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 11.9 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($4,951 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌315.4% higher power demand at 270W vs 65W.
❌Older platform position on LGA4189 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon W-3375 better than Core i5-13400F?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon W-3375 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 gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Xeon W-3375 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 24.0% more average FPS across 8 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon W-3375 is the better fit. You are getting 55.3% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 38 cores and 76 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 185% larger total L3 cache (57 MB vs 20 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Xeon W-3375 is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-13400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Xeon W-3375 is 2426.0% more expensive on MSRP at $4,951 MSRP versus $196 MSRP, and it gives you a 24.0% average FPS lead across 8 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-13400F is also 969.9% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 11.9 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds 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 2021) and a healthier platform with LGA1700 and DDR5 instead of LGA4189. 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 W-3375 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Xeon W-3375
1080p
low	171 FPS	191 FPS
medium	158 FPS	154 FPS
high	132 FPS	126 FPS
ultra	112 FPS	98 FPS
1440p
low	143 FPS	157 FPS
medium	123 FPS	123 FPS
high	99 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	84 FPS	76 FPS
4K
low	81 FPS	72 FPS
medium	74 FPS	60 FPS
high	59 FPS	47 FPS
ultra	46 FPS	39 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Xeon W-3375

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Xeon W-3375
1080p
low	545 FPS	496 FPS
medium	464 FPS	431 FPS
high	389 FPS	345 FPS
ultra	356 FPS	286 FPS
1440p
low	458 FPS	425 FPS
medium	403 FPS	375 FPS
high	345 FPS	310 FPS
ultra	301 FPS	247 FPS
4K
low	280 FPS	264 FPS
medium	247 FPS	237 FPS
high	231 FPS	208 FPS
ultra	204 FPS	174 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Xeon W-3375

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Xeon W-3375
1080p
low	530 FPS	1025 FPS
medium	449 FPS	937 FPS
high	415 FPS	880 FPS
ultra	375 FPS	796 FPS
1440p
low	490 FPS	799 FPS
medium	422 FPS	710 FPS
high	382 FPS	667 FPS
ultra	343 FPS	597 FPS
4K
low	393 FPS	514 FPS
medium	331 FPS	424 FPS
high	296 FPS	372 FPS
ultra	246 FPS	305 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Xeon W-3375

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-13400F	Xeon W-3375
1080p
low	626 FPS	932 FPS
medium	626 FPS	847 FPS
high	626 FPS	732 FPS
ultra	626 FPS	633 FPS
1440p
low	626 FPS	732 FPS
medium	626 FPS	644 FPS
high	598 FPS	554 FPS
ultra	521 FPS	480 FPS
4K
low	535 FPS	532 FPS
medium	492 FPS	476 FPS
high	439 FPS	419 FPS
ultra	382 FPS	360 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open Xeon W-3375

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and Xeon W-3375

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 W-3375

The Xeon W-3375 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2021-07-29. It is based on the Ice Lake-W (2021) architecture. It features 38 cores and 76 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 57 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4189. Thermal design power (TDP): 270 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 59,091 points. Launch price was $4,499.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon W-3375 offers 38 cores / 76 threads — the Xeon W-3375 has 28 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 4 GHz on the Xeon W-3375 — a 14% 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 W-3375 uses Ice Lake-W (2021) (10 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Xeon W-3375's 59,091 — a 81% lead for the Xeon W-3375. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,407 vs 1,818, a 27.9% lead for the Core i5-13400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 11,408 vs 17,713 (43.3% advantage for the Xeon W-3375). L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 57 MB (total) on the Xeon W-3375.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Xeon W-3375
Cores / Threads	10 / 16	38 / 76+280%
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz+15%	4 GHz
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	2.5 GHz
L3 Cache	20 MB (total)	57 MB (total)+185%
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)+25%	1 MB (per core)
Process	Intel 7 nm-30%	10 nm
Architecture	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)	Ice Lake-W (2021)
PassMark	25,029	59,091+136%
Cinebench R23 Multi	16,211	—
Geekbench 6 Single	2,407+32%	1,818
Geekbench 6 Multi	11,408	17,713+55%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-13400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon W-3375 uses LGA4189 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-13400F versus DDR4-3200 on the Xeon W-3375 — the Core i5-13400F supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon W-3375 supports up to 4096 GB of RAM compared to 192 GB — 182.1% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-13400F) vs 8 (Xeon W-3375). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 64 (Xeon W-3375) — the Xeon W-3375 offers 44 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-13400F) and Intel C621A (Xeon W-3375).

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Xeon W-3375
Socket	LGA1700	LGA4189
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200+25%	DDR4-3200
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB	4096 GB+2033%
RAM Channels	2	8+300%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	64+220%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the Xeon W-3375 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F) vs true (Xeon W-3375). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600; Xeon W-3375 rivals EPYC 7543.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	Xeon W-3375
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	—	None
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	true
Target Use	Gaming	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the Xeon W-3375 debuted at $4951. On MSRP ($196 vs $4951), the Core i5-13400F is $4755 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 11.9 pts/$ for the Xeon W-3375 — making the Core i5-13400F the 165.8% better value option.