
Core i5-13400F
Popular choices:

M2
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
- β Better for gaming: +34.2% higher average FPS across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- β 100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- β Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike M2.
Trade-offs
- βLaunch MSRP is still $196 MSRP, while M2 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- β225% higher power demand at 65W vs 20W.
M2
2022Why buy it
- β Draws 20W instead of 65W, a 45W reduction.
Trade-offs
- βWorse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- βLower PassMark (14,933 vs 25,029).
- βNo boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Core i5-13400F
2023M2
2022Why buy it
- β Better for gaming: +34.2% higher average FPS across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- β 100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- β Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike M2.
Why buy it
- β Draws 20W instead of 65W, a 45W reduction.
Trade-offs
- βLaunch MSRP is still $196 MSRP, while M2 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- β225% higher power demand at 65W vs 20W.
Trade-offs
- βWorse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- βLower PassMark (14,933 vs 25,029).
- βNo boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i5-13400F better than M2?
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 | M2 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 171 FPS | 175 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 140 FPS |
| high | 132 FPS | 113 FPS |
| ultra | 112 FPS | 90 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 143 FPS | 141 FPS |
| medium | 123 FPS | 111 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 88 FPS |
| ultra | 84 FPS | 69 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 81 FPS | 66 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 55 FPS |
| high | 59 FPS | 44 FPS |
| ultra | 46 FPS | 35 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | M2 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 545 FPS | 288 FPS |
| medium | 464 FPS | 246 FPS |
| high | 389 FPS | 213 FPS |
| ultra | 356 FPS | 166 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 458 FPS | 248 FPS |
| medium | 403 FPS | 220 FPS |
| high | 345 FPS | 193 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 150 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 280 FPS | 174 FPS |
| medium | 247 FPS | 159 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 136 FPS |
| ultra | 204 FPS | 106 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | M2 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 373 FPS |
| medium | 449 FPS | 373 FPS |
| high | 415 FPS | 373 FPS |
| ultra | 375 FPS | 373 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 490 FPS | 373 FPS |
| medium | 422 FPS | 373 FPS |
| high | 382 FPS | 373 FPS |
| ultra | 343 FPS | 363 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 393 FPS | 373 FPS |
| medium | 331 FPS | 314 FPS |
| high | 296 FPS | 277 FPS |
| ultra | 246 FPS | 221 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | M2 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 373 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 373 FPS |
| high | 626 FPS | 373 FPS |
| ultra | 626 FPS | 373 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 373 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 373 FPS |
| high | 598 FPS | 373 FPS |
| ultra | 521 FPS | 373 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 535 FPS | 373 FPS |
| medium | 492 FPS | 373 FPS |
| high | 439 FPS | 373 FPS |
| ultra | 382 FPS | 328 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and M2

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 (2023β2024) 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.
M2
M2
The M2 is manufactured by Apple. It was released in 10 June 2022 (3 years ago). It features 8 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.424 GHz, with boost up to 3.48 GHz. L2 cache: 20 MB. Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: none. Thermal design power (TDP): 20 Watt. Memory support: LPDDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 14,933 points. Launch price was $149.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the M2 offers 8 cores / 8 threads β the Core i5-13400F has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 3.48 GHz on the M2 β a 27.7% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2.424 GHz). The Core i5-13400F is built on the Raptor Lake-S (2023β2024) architecture. In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the M2's 14,933 β a 50.5% lead for the Core i5-13400F.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | M2 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 10 / 16+25% | 8 / 8 |
| Boost Clock | 4.6 GHz+32% | 3.48 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz+3% | 2.424 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 20 MB (total) | β |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 20 MB+1500% |
| Process | Intel 7 nm | 5 nm-29% |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake-S (2023β2024) | β |
| PassMark | 25,029+68% | 14,933 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 16,211 | β |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 2,407 | β |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 11,408 | β |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-13400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the M2 uses none (PCIe 4.0) β making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | M2 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | none |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 | β |
| Max RAM Capacity | 192 GB | β |
| RAM Channels | 2 | β |
| ECC Support | No | β |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | β |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F) / not specified (M2). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | M2 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | β |
| Unlocked | No | β |
| AVX-512 | No | β |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | β |
| Target Use | Gaming | β |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













