
Core i5-13400F
Popular choices:

Xeon w3-2525
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
- ✅Costs $413 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $609 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 171.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 47.0 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $609 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 175W, a 110W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon w3-2525.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon w3-2525 across 32 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (11,408 vs 15,000).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon w3-2525, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.
Xeon w3-2525
2024Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +18.4% higher average FPS across 32 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 8 cores / 16 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅220% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 47.0 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($609 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌169.2% higher power demand at 175W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Core i5-13400F
2023Xeon w3-2525
2024Why buy it
- ✅Costs $413 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $609 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 171.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 47.0 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $609 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 175W, a 110W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon w3-2525.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +18.4% higher average FPS across 32 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 8 cores / 16 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅220% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon w3-2525 across 32 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (11,408 vs 15,000).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon w3-2525, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 47.0 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($609 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌169.2% higher power demand at 175W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Xeon w3-2525 better than Core i5-13400F?
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 w3-2525 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 171 FPS | 188 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 155 FPS |
| high | 132 FPS | 128 FPS |
| ultra | 112 FPS | 108 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 143 FPS | 152 FPS |
| medium | 123 FPS | 122 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 99 FPS |
| ultra | 84 FPS | 83 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 81 FPS | 83 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 72 FPS |
| high | 59 FPS | 58 FPS |
| ultra | 46 FPS | 45 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Xeon w3-2525 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 545 FPS | 587 FPS |
| medium | 464 FPS | 486 FPS |
| high | 389 FPS | 401 FPS |
| ultra | 356 FPS | 361 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 458 FPS | 497 FPS |
| medium | 403 FPS | 429 FPS |
| high | 345 FPS | 364 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 312 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 280 FPS | 308 FPS |
| medium | 247 FPS | 268 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 248 FPS |
| ultra | 204 FPS | 218 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Xeon w3-2525 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 716 FPS |
| medium | 449 FPS | 716 FPS |
| high | 415 FPS | 716 FPS |
| ultra | 375 FPS | 716 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 490 FPS | 716 FPS |
| medium | 422 FPS | 716 FPS |
| high | 382 FPS | 716 FPS |
| ultra | 343 FPS | 651 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 393 FPS | 552 FPS |
| medium | 331 FPS | 454 FPS |
| high | 296 FPS | 412 FPS |
| ultra | 246 FPS | 332 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Xeon w3-2525 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 716 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 716 FPS |
| high | 626 FPS | 716 FPS |
| ultra | 626 FPS | 716 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 716 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 716 FPS |
| high | 598 FPS | 716 FPS |
| ultra | 521 FPS | 634 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 535 FPS | 692 FPS |
| medium | 492 FPS | 604 FPS |
| high | 439 FPS | 533 FPS |
| ultra | 382 FPS | 437 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and Xeon w3-2525

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 w3-2525
Xeon w3-2525
The Xeon w3-2525 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 August 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 4.5 GHz. L3 cache: 22.5 MB. L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4677. Thermal design power (TDP): 175 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4400. Passmark benchmark score: 28,641 points. Launch price was $609.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon w3-2525 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 4.5 GHz on the Xeon w3-2525 — a 2.2% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 3.5 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Xeon w3-2525 uses Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) (Intel 7 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Xeon w3-2525's 28,641 — a 13.5% lead for the Xeon w3-2525. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,407 vs 2,000, a 18.5% lead for the Core i5-13400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 11,408 vs 15,000 (27.2% advantage for the Xeon w3-2525). L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 22.5 MB on the Xeon w3-2525.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Xeon w3-2525 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 10 / 16+25% | 8 / 16 |
| Boost Clock | 4.6 GHz+2% | 4.5 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz | 3.5 GHz+40% |
| L3 Cache | 20 MB (total) | 22.5 MB+13% |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core)+60% |
| Process | Intel 7 nm | Intel 7 nm |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) | Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) |
| PassMark | 25,029 | 28,641+14% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 16,211 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 2,407+20% | 2,000 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 11,408 | 15,000+31% |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-13400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon w3-2525 uses LGA4677 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 memory speed. The Core i5-13400F supports up to 192 GB of RAM compared to 2 TB — 195.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-13400F) vs 4 (Xeon w3-2525). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 64 (Xeon w3-2525) — the Xeon w3-2525 offers 44 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-13400F) and W790 (Xeon w3-2525).
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Xeon w3-2525 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | LGA4677 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0 | PCIe 5.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 | DDR5-4400 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 192 GB | 2 TB+967% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 4+100% |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | 64+220% |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the Xeon w3-2525 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 w3-2525 targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600; Xeon w3-2525 rivals Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Xeon w3-2525 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | — | None |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d |
| Target Use | Gaming | Workstation |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the Xeon w3-2525 debuted at $609. On MSRP ($196 vs $609), the Core i5-13400F is $413 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 47.0 pts/$ for the Xeon w3-2525 — making the Core i5-13400F the 92.3% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Xeon w3-2525 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $196-68% | $609 |
| Performance per Dollar | 127.7+172% | 47.0 |
| Release Date | 2023 | 2024 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













