
Core i5-13400F
Popular choices:

Ryzen 9 3900X
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 $303 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $499 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 96.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 65.2 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $499 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 105W, a 40W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of AM4 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 9 3900X across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (11,408 vs 12,000).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 64 MB).
Ryzen 9 3900X
2019Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +37.6% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+220% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 20 MB).
- ✅20% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 65.2 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($499 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌61.5% higher power demand at 105W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on AM4 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
Core i5-13400F
2023Ryzen 9 3900X
2019Why buy it
- ✅Costs $303 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $499 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 96.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 65.2 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $499 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 105W, a 40W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of AM4 and DDR4.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +37.6% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+220% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 20 MB).
- ✅20% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 9 3900X across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (11,408 vs 12,000).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 64 MB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 65.2 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($499 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌61.5% higher power demand at 105W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on AM4 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen 9 3900X 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 | Ryzen 9 3900X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 171 FPS | 209 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 170 FPS |
| high | 132 FPS | 140 FPS |
| ultra | 112 FPS | 114 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 143 FPS | 171 FPS |
| medium | 123 FPS | 131 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 104 FPS |
| ultra | 84 FPS | 86 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 81 FPS | 92 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 77 FPS |
| high | 59 FPS | 61 FPS |
| ultra | 46 FPS | 49 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen 9 3900X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 545 FPS | 781 FPS |
| medium | 464 FPS | 654 FPS |
| high | 389 FPS | 510 FPS |
| ultra | 356 FPS | 447 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 458 FPS | 648 FPS |
| medium | 403 FPS | 552 FPS |
| high | 345 FPS | 452 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 369 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 280 FPS | 380 FPS |
| medium | 247 FPS | 326 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 293 FPS |
| ultra | 204 FPS | 258 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen 9 3900X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 813 FPS |
| medium | 449 FPS | 794 FPS |
| high | 415 FPS | 730 FPS |
| ultra | 375 FPS | 647 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 490 FPS | 707 FPS |
| medium | 422 FPS | 583 FPS |
| high | 382 FPS | 522 FPS |
| ultra | 343 FPS | 459 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 393 FPS | 503 FPS |
| medium | 331 FPS | 403 FPS |
| high | 296 FPS | 361 FPS |
| ultra | 246 FPS | 292 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen 9 3900X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 813 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 813 FPS |
| high | 626 FPS | 813 FPS |
| ultra | 626 FPS | 813 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 813 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 813 FPS |
| high | 598 FPS | 714 FPS |
| ultra | 521 FPS | 619 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 535 FPS | 669 FPS |
| medium | 492 FPS | 594 FPS |
| high | 439 FPS | 525 FPS |
| ultra | 382 FPS | 437 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and Ryzen 9 3900X

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 9 3900X
Ryzen 9 3900X
The Ryzen 9 3900X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 7 July 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 4.6 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 7 nm, 12 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 32,517 points. Launch price was $499.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Ryzen 9 3900X offers 12 cores / 24 threads — the Ryzen 9 3900X has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 4.6 GHz on the Ryzen 9 3900X — identical boost frequencies (base: 2.5 GHz vs 3.8 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Ryzen 9 3900X uses Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020) (7 nm, 12 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Ryzen 9 3900X's 32,517 — a 26% lead for the Ryzen 9 3900X. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,407 vs 1,300, a 59.7% lead for the Core i5-13400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 11,408 vs 12,000 (5.1% advantage for the Ryzen 9 3900X). L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 64 MB on the Ryzen 9 3900X.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen 9 3900X |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 10 / 16 | 12 / 24+20% |
| Boost Clock | 4.6 GHz | 4.6 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz | 3.8 GHz+52% |
| L3 Cache | 20 MB (total) | 64 MB+220% |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core)+150% | 512K (per core) |
| Process | Intel 7 nm | 7 nm, 12 nm |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) | Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020) |
| PassMark | 25,029 | 32,517+30% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 16,211 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 2,407+85% | 1,300 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 11,408 | 12,000+5% |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-13400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Ryzen 9 3900X uses AM4 (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 Ryzen 9 3900X — the Core i5-13400F supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i5-13400F supports up to 192 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 40% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 24 (Ryzen 9 3900X) — the Ryzen 9 3900X offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-13400F) and X570,B550 (Ryzen 9 3900X).
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen 9 3900X |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | AM4 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200+25% | DDR4-3200 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 192 GB+50% | 128 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | 24+20% |
Advanced Features
Only the Ryzen 9 3900X has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F) vs AMD-V (Ryzen 9 3900X). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming, Ryzen 9 3900X targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen 9 3900X |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | — | None |
| Unlocked | No | Yes |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | AMD-V |
| Target Use | Gaming | Workstation |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the Ryzen 9 3900X debuted at $499. On MSRP ($196 vs $499), the Core i5-13400F is $303 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 65.2 pts/$ for the Ryzen 9 3900X — making the Core i5-13400F the 64.8% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen 9 3900X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $196-61% | $499 |
| Performance per Dollar | 127.7+96% | 65.2 |
| Release Date | 2023 | 2019 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












