Microsoft Flight Simulator
Thanks to the addition of E cores even in the lowest Core i5 Raptor Lake models (13400F and 13400), the raw performance between generations has advanced the most in years. However, the improvement may not always happen, the relatively small number of performance ones (P) combined with the lower Turbo Boost 2.0 clock speeds some games don’t like, and when they reach for E cores, the concept of big.LITTLE is at once detrimental.
Microsoft Flight Simulator
Disclaimer: The performance of this game changes and improves frequently due to continuous updates. We verify the consistency of the results by re-testing the Ryzen 9 5900X processor before each measurement. In case of significant deviations, we discard the older results and start building the database from scratch. Due to the incompleteness of the MFS results, we do not use MFS to calculate the average gaming performance of the processors.
Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Low; API DirectX 11; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: off; test scene: custom (Paris-Charles de Gaulle, Air Traffic: AI, February 14, 9:00) autopilot: from 1000 m until hitting the terrain.
Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset Low; API DirectX 11; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: off; test scene: custom (Paris-Charles de Gaulle, Air Traffic: AI, February 14, 9:00) autopilot: from 1000 m until hitting the terrain.
Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 11; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: TAA; test scene: custom (Paris-Charles de Gaulle, Air Traffic: AI, February 14, 9:00) autopilot: from 1000 m until hitting the terrain.
Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Ultra; API DirectX 11; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: TAA; test scene: custom (Paris-Charles de Gaulle, Air Traffic: AI, February 14, 9:00) autopilot: from 1000 m until hitting the terrain.
- Contents
- Intel Core i5-13400F in detail
- Methodology: performance tests
- Methodology: how we measure power draw
- Methodology: temperature and clock speed tests
- Test setup
- 3DMark
- Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla
- Borderlands 3
- Counter-Strike: GO
- Cyberpunk 2077
- DOOM Eternal
- F1 2020
- Metro Exodus
- Microsoft Flight Simulator
- Shadow of the Tomb Raider
- Total War Saga: Troy
- Overall gaming performance
- Gaming performance per euro
- PCMark and Geekbench
- Web performance
- 3D rendering: Cinebench, Blender, ...
- Video 1/2: Adobe Premiere Pro
- Video 2/2: DaVinci Resolve Studio
- Graphics effects: Adobe After Effects
- Video encoding
- Audio encoding
- Broadcasting (OBS and Xsplit)
- Photos 1/2: Adobe Photoshop and Lightroom
- Photos 2/2: Affinity Photo, Topaz Labs AI Apps, ZPS X, ...
- (De)compression
- (De)encryption
- Numerical computing
- Simulations
- Memory and cache tests
- Processor power draw curve
- Average processor power draw
- Performance per watt
- Achieved CPU clock speed
- CPU temperature
- Conclusion
I wonder how the gaming results, especially power consumption, would look with E-cores turned off. Also, whether the Raptor Lake stepping has any performance advantage over Alder Lake one.
We will do ASAP.
After all, it seems that it might not be so easy to get Ci5-13400F in stepping B0. Big domestic shops (on the Czech-Slovak market) have only stepping C0 available, but we believe that sooner or later at least one piece will appear for testing. The availability of the variant based on Raptor Cove will probably be very low.
When we were looking for Ci5-12400 stepping H0 last year, they were also in the minority, but there were still some, about in 40/60 ratio (H0/C0). It’s worse over here, and Intel is obviously trying to use as many B0 “silicon” as possible for more powerful processors.