
Core i5-13400F
Popular choices:

Ryzen 5 240
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
- ✅+8% higher PassMark.
- ✅+25% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 16 MB).
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen 5 240.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 5 240 across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $196 MSRP, while Ryzen 5 240 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌44.4% higher power demand at 65W vs 45W.
Ryzen 5 240
2025Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +5.3% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 45W instead of 65W, a 20W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (23,167 vs 25,029).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (16 MB vs 20 MB).
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Core i5-13400F
2023Ryzen 5 240
2025Why buy it
- ✅+8% higher PassMark.
- ✅+25% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 16 MB).
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen 5 240.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +5.3% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 45W instead of 65W, a 20W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 5 240 across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $196 MSRP, while Ryzen 5 240 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌44.4% higher power demand at 65W vs 45W.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (23,167 vs 25,029).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (16 MB vs 20 MB).
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen 5 240 better than Core i5-13400F?
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 | Ryzen 5 240 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 171 FPS | 265 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 239 FPS |
| high | 132 FPS | 200 FPS |
| ultra | 112 FPS | 172 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 143 FPS | 234 FPS |
| medium | 123 FPS | 191 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 156 FPS |
| ultra | 84 FPS | 138 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 81 FPS | 162 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 135 FPS |
| high | 59 FPS | 104 FPS |
| ultra | 46 FPS | 91 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen 5 240 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 545 FPS | 426 FPS |
| medium | 464 FPS | 353 FPS |
| high | 389 FPS | 308 FPS |
| ultra | 356 FPS | 271 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 458 FPS | 369 FPS |
| medium | 403 FPS | 320 FPS |
| high | 345 FPS | 281 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 240 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 280 FPS | 265 FPS |
| medium | 247 FPS | 235 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 218 FPS |
| ultra | 204 FPS | 183 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen 5 240 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 579 FPS |
| medium | 449 FPS | 579 FPS |
| high | 415 FPS | 579 FPS |
| ultra | 375 FPS | 579 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 490 FPS | 579 FPS |
| medium | 422 FPS | 579 FPS |
| high | 382 FPS | 520 FPS |
| ultra | 343 FPS | 449 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 393 FPS | 501 FPS |
| medium | 331 FPS | 445 FPS |
| high | 296 FPS | 380 FPS |
| ultra | 246 FPS | 315 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen 5 240 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 579 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 579 FPS |
| high | 626 FPS | 579 FPS |
| ultra | 626 FPS | 579 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 579 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 579 FPS |
| high | 598 FPS | 579 FPS |
| ultra | 521 FPS | 545 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 535 FPS | 565 FPS |
| medium | 492 FPS | 506 FPS |
| high | 439 FPS | 450 FPS |
| ultra | 382 FPS | 386 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and Ryzen 5 240

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.


Ryzen 5 240
Ryzen 5 240
The Ryzen 5 240 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 6 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Hawk Point (2024−2025) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 4.3 GHz, with boost up to 5 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: FP8. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 23,167 points. Launch price was $299.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Ryzen 5 240 offers 6 cores / 12 threads — the Core i5-13400F has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 5 GHz on the Ryzen 5 240 — a 8.3% clock advantage for the Ryzen 5 240 (base: 2.5 GHz vs 4.3 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Ryzen 5 240 uses Hawk Point (2024−2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Ryzen 5 240's 23,167 — a 7.7% lead for the Core i5-13400F. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 16 MB (total) on the Ryzen 5 240.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen 5 240 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 10 / 16+67% | 6 / 12 |
| Boost Clock | 4.6 GHz | 5 GHz+9% |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz | 4.3 GHz+72% |
| L3 Cache | 20 MB (total)+25% | 16 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core)+25% | 1 MB (per core) |
| Process | Intel 7 nm | 4 nm-43% |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) | Hawk Point (2024−2025) |
| PassMark | 25,029+8% | 23,167 |
| 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 Ryzen 5 240 uses FP8 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen 5 240 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | FP8 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| 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 (Ryzen 5 240). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen 5 240 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | — |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | — |
| Target Use | Gaming | — |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the Ryzen 5 240 debuted at $0. On MSRP ($196 vs $0), the Ryzen 5 240 is $196 cheaper.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen 5 240 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $196 | $0-100% |
| Performance per Dollar | 127.7 | — |
| Release Date | 2023 | 2025 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












