
Core i5-13400F
Popular choices:

Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
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
- ✅+26.8% higher Geekbench multi-core.
- ✅Costs $803 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $999 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 364.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 27.5 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $999 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 180W, a 115W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of SP3r2 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper 1950X across 9 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 32 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Ryzen Threadripper 1950X, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
2017Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +19.0% higher average FPS across 9 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+60% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 20 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅220% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (9,000 vs 11,408).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 27.5 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($999 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌176.9% higher power demand at 180W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on SP3r2 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Core i5-13400F
2023Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
2017Why buy it
- ✅+26.8% higher Geekbench multi-core.
- ✅Costs $803 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $999 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 364.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 27.5 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $999 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 180W, a 115W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of SP3r2 and DDR4.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +19.0% higher average FPS across 9 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+60% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 20 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅220% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper 1950X across 9 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 32 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Ryzen Threadripper 1950X, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (9,000 vs 11,408).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 27.5 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($999 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌176.9% higher power demand at 180W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on SP3r2 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i5-13400F better than Ryzen Threadripper 1950X?
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 Threadripper 1950X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 171 FPS | 198 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 172 FPS |
| high | 132 FPS | 141 FPS |
| ultra | 112 FPS | 110 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 143 FPS | 155 FPS |
| medium | 123 FPS | 129 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 103 FPS |
| ultra | 84 FPS | 80 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 81 FPS | 69 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 61 FPS |
| high | 59 FPS | 48 FPS |
| ultra | 46 FPS | 37 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen Threadripper 1950X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 545 FPS | 407 FPS |
| medium | 464 FPS | 365 FPS |
| high | 389 FPS | 311 FPS |
| ultra | 356 FPS | 259 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 458 FPS | 348 FPS |
| medium | 403 FPS | 318 FPS |
| high | 345 FPS | 272 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 224 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 280 FPS | 224 FPS |
| medium | 247 FPS | 204 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 185 FPS |
| ultra | 204 FPS | 150 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen Threadripper 1950X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 687 FPS |
| medium | 449 FPS | 687 FPS |
| high | 415 FPS | 687 FPS |
| ultra | 375 FPS | 687 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 490 FPS | 687 FPS |
| medium | 422 FPS | 687 FPS |
| high | 382 FPS | 656 FPS |
| ultra | 343 FPS | 584 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 393 FPS | 519 FPS |
| medium | 331 FPS | 428 FPS |
| high | 296 FPS | 383 FPS |
| ultra | 246 FPS | 321 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen Threadripper 1950X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 687 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 687 FPS |
| high | 626 FPS | 687 FPS |
| ultra | 626 FPS | 640 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 687 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 687 FPS |
| high | 598 FPS | 611 FPS |
| ultra | 521 FPS | 510 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 535 FPS | 578 FPS |
| medium | 492 FPS | 517 FPS |
| high | 439 FPS | 458 FPS |
| ultra | 382 FPS | 382 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and Ryzen Threadripper 1950X

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 Threadripper 1950X
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
The Ryzen Threadripper 1950X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 August 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Zen (2017−2020) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.4 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: SP3r2. Thermal design power (TDP): 180 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Quad-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 27,487 points. Launch price was $999.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X has 6 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 4 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X — a 14% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 3.4 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X uses Zen (2017−2020) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X's 27,487 — a 9.4% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,407 vs 1,040, a 79.3% lead for the Core i5-13400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 11,408 vs 9,000 (23.6% advantage for the Core i5-13400F). L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 32 MB on the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen Threadripper 1950X |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 10 / 16 | 16 / 32+60% |
| Boost Clock | 4.6 GHz+15% | 4 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz | 3.4 GHz+36% |
| L3 Cache | 20 MB (total) | 32 MB+60% |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core)+150% | 512K (per core) |
| Process | Intel 7 nm-50% | 14 nm |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) | Zen (2017−2020) |
| PassMark | 25,029 | 27,487+10% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 16,211 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 2,407+131% | 1,040 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 11,408+27% | 9,000 |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-13400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X uses SP3r2 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-13400F versus DDR4-2666 on the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X — the Core i5-13400F supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Ryzen Threadripper 1950X supports up to 256 GB of RAM compared to 192 GB — 28.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-13400F) vs 4 (Ryzen Threadripper 1950X). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 64 (Ryzen Threadripper 1950X) — the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X offers 44 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-13400F) and X399 (Ryzen Threadripper 1950X).
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen Threadripper 1950X |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | SP3r2 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200+25% | DDR4-2666 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 192 GB | 256 GB+33% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 4+100% |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | 64+220% |
Advanced Features
Only the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 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 Threadripper 1950X). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming, Ryzen Threadripper 1950X targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen Threadripper 1950X |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| 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 Threadripper 1950X debuted at $999. On MSRP ($196 vs $999), the Core i5-13400F is $803 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 27.5 pts/$ for the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X — making the Core i5-13400F the 129.1% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | Ryzen Threadripper 1950X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $196-80% | $999 |
| Performance per Dollar | 127.7+364% | 27.5 |
| Release Date | 2023 | 2017 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












