Site icon HWCooling.net

Intel Core i5-13400F: Best price/perf ratio, questionable for games

Methodology: how we measure power draw

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.

Intel Core i5-13400F in detail

While previous generations of Core i5-1×400(F), Alder Lake and Comet Lake had physically six cores with Hyper Threading support (i.e. two threads per core), Raptor Lake already has 10 cores. Six large (with HT) and four small (E), with 16 threads total.

Like the Core i5-12400(F), the Core i5-13400(F) comes in two variants, each using a different chip. The processor with the S-Spec code SRMBN (stepping C0) has the smaller one (~209 mm²), of the Alder Lake processors (natively with 8 “P” and 8 “E” cores), the other, with an area of approximately 257 mm (S-Spec code SRMBG, stepping B0) is based on a Raptor Lake chip and is also produced by the newer Intel 7 Ultra manufacturing node. There may thus be some differences in efficiency and cooling across the variants.

There were also differences in operating characteristics across the steppings (C0 and H0) for the Core i5-12400(F). Computing and gaming performance, however, will most likely be the same, as Intel does not differentiate in the clock speed parameters, and for both C0 and B0 stepping, the base all-core boost is 2.5 GHz (for P cores) and 1.8 GHz (for E cores). In practice, without limited power supply (but even with it, according to TDP/65 W), all-core boost clock speeds are significantly higher, compared to the Core i5-12400(F) on P cores by 100 MHz (4100 MHz). The single-core boost by up to 400 MHz (4600 MHz). Despite the fact that this line still only supports TB 2.0, Intel has significantly increased performance for single-threaded applications. This is probably also with a view to not dramatically lag behind the Ryzen 5 7000 processors in this regard, where even the lower model (7600) reaches 5200 MHz, higher (7600X) then up to 5500 MHz. The Core i5-13400(F) is thus “only” 900 MHz slower in single-threaded tasks.

For the tests, we used the variant with stepping C0 out of the two possible ones, which has a unique order number CM8071505093005 (tray)/BX8071513400FSRMBN (box) in addition to a different S-Spec code (SRMBN). This can be a helpful identifier when purchasing a particular variant. The Core i5-13400F with the S-Spec code SRMBG (stepping B0) has the order number CM8071504821107 (tray).

As always, the “F” in the processor’s codename signifies a non-functional or deactivated graphics core, and included is the Intel Laminar RM1 cooler. We discussed the latter in a separate test, where it showed good results (with limited power according to the TDP of 65 W, the operation is also relatively quiet after the PWM curve is adjusted) even for the Ci5-12400 under maximum load, from which the Core i5-13400(F) is not that far. PL2 145 W is vastly exaggerated for these processors, power draw is always significantly lower, under 100 W.

ManufacturerIntelIntelAMD
LineCore i5Core i5Ryzen 5
SKU13400F124007600
CodenameRaptor LakeAlder LakeRaphael
CPU microarchitectureGolden Cove (P) + Gracemont (E)Golden Cove (P)Zen 4
Manufacturing node7 nm7 nm5 nm + 6 nm
SocketLGA 1700LGA 1700AM5
Launch date01/03/202301/04/202201/10/2023
Launch price196 USD192 USD229 USD
Core count6+466
Thread count161212
Base frequency2.5 GHz (P)/1.8 GHz (E)2.5 GHz (P)3.8 GHz
Max. Boost (1 core)4.6 GHz (P)/3.3 GHz (E)4.4 GHz (P)5.1 GHz (unofficially 5,16 GHz)
Max. boost (all-core)4.1 GHz4.0 GHz (P)N/A
Typ boostuTB 2.0TB 2.0PB 2.0
L1i cache 32 kB/core (P)/64 kB core (E)32 kB/core (P)32 kB/core
L1d cache 48 kB/core (P)/32 kB/core48 kB/core (P)32 kB/core
L2 cache 1,25 MB/jadro (P)/ 2×2 MB/4 cores (E)1,25 MB/core (P)1 MB/core
L3 cache 1× 20 MB1× 18 MB1× 32 MB
TDP65 W65 W65 W
Max. power draw during boost148 W (PL2)117 W (PL2)88 W (PPT)
Overclocking supportNoNoYes
Memory (RAM) support DDR5-4800/DDR4-3200DDR5-4800/DDR4-3200DDR5-5200
Memory channel count2× 64 bit2× 64 bit2× 64 bit
RAM bandwidth76.8 GB/s/51.2 GB/s76.8 GB/s or 51.2 GB/s (DDR4)83,2 GB/s
ECC RAM support NoNoYes (depends on motherboard support)
PCI Express support 5.0/4.05.0/4.05.0
PCI Express lanes×16 (5.0) + ×4 (4.0)×16 (5.0) + ×4 (4.0)×16 + ×4 + ×4
Chipset downlinkDMI 4.0 ×8DMI 4.0 ×8PCIe 4.0 ×4
Chipset downlink bandwidth16.0 GB/s duplex16.0 GB/s duplex8,0 GB/s duplex
BCLK100 MHz100 MHz100 MHz
Die size~209 or ~257 mm² (depending on variant)~209 or ~160 mm² (depending on variant)66,3 mm² + 118 mm²
Transistor count? bn.? bn.6,57 + 3,37 bn.
TIM used under IHSSolderSolderSolder
Boxed cooler in packageIntel Laminar RM1Intel Laminar RM1Wraith Stealth
Instruction set extensionsSSE4.2, AVX2, FMA, SHA, VNNI (256-bit), GNA 3.0, VAES (256-bit), vProSSE4.2, AVX2, FMA, SHA, VNNI (256-bit), GNA 2.0, VAES (256-bit)SSE4.2, AVX2, FMA, SHA, VAES (256-bit), AVX-512, VNNI
VirtualizationVT-x, VT-d, EPTVT-x, VT-d, EPTAMD-V, IOMMU, NPT
Integrated GPUN/AUHD 730AMD Radeon
GPU architectureXe LP (Gen. 12)RDNA 2
GPU: shader count24128
GPU: TMU count128
GPU: ROP count84
GPU frequency350–1550 MHz400–2200 MHz
Display outputsDP 1.4a, HDMI 2.0bDP 2.0, HDMI 2.1
Max. resolution5120 × 3200 px (60 Hz)3840 × 2160 px (60 Hz)
HW video encodeHEVC, VP9HEVC, VP9
HW video decodeAV1, HEVC, VP9AV1, HEVC, VP9
/* Here you can add custom CSS for the current table */ /* Lean more about CSS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascading_Style_Sheets */ /* To prevent the use of styles to other tables use "#supsystic-table-2076" as a base selector for example: #supsystic-table-2076 { ... } #supsystic-table-2076 tbody { ... } #supsystic-table-2076 tbody tr { ... } */




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.

Gaming tests

We test performance in games in four resolutions with different graphics settings. To warm up, there is more or less a theoretical resolution of 1280 × 720 px. We had been tweaking graphics settings for this resolution for a long time. We finally decided to go for the lowest possible (Low, Lowest, Ultra Low, …) settings that a game allows.

One could argue that a processor does not calculate how many objects are drawn in such settings (so-called draw calls). However, with high detail at this very low resolution, there was not much difference in performance compared to FHD (which we also test). On the contrary, the GPU load was clearly higher, and this impractical setting should demonstrate the performance of a processor with the lowest possible participation of a graphics card.

At higher resolutions, high settings (for FHD and QHD) and highest (for UHD) are used. In Full HD it’s usually with Anti-Aliasing turned off, but overall, these are relatively practical settings that are commonly used.

The selection of games was made considering the diversity of genres, player popularity and processor performance requirements. For a complete list, see Chapters 7–16. A built-in benchmark is used when a game has one, otherwise we have created our own scenes, which we always repeat with each processor in the same way. We use OCAT to record fps, or the times of individual frames, from which fps are then calculated, and FLAT to analyze CSV. Both were developed by the author of articles (and videos) from GPUreport.cz. For the highest possible accuracy, all runs are repeated three times and the average values of average and minimum fps are drawn in the graphs. These multiple repetitions also apply to non-gaming tests.

Computing tests

Let’s start lightly with PCMark 10, which tests more than sixty sub-tasks in various applications as part of a complete set of “benchmarks for a modern office”. It then sorts them into fewer thematic categories and for the best possible overview we include the gained points from them in the graphs. Lighter test tasks are also represented by tests in a web browser – Speedometer and Octane. Other tests usually represent higher load or are aimed at advanced users.

We test the 3D rendering performance in Cinebench. In R20, where the results are more widespread, but mainly in R23. Rendering in this version takes longer with each processor, cycles of at least ten minutes. We also test 3D rendering in Blender, with the Cycles render in the BMW and Classroom projects. You can also compare the latter with the test results of graphics cards (contains the same number of tiles).

We test how processors perform in video editing in Adobe Premiere Pro and DaVinci Resolve Studio 17. We use a PugetBench plugin, which deals with all the tasks you may encounter when editing videos. We also use PugetBench services in Adobe After Effects, where the performance of creating graphic effects is tested. Some subtasks use GPU acceleration, but we never turn it off, as no one will do it in practice. Some things don’t even work without GPU acceleration, but on the contrary, it’s interesting to see that the performance in the tasks accelerated by the graphics card also varies as some operations are still serviced by the CPU.

We test video encoding under SVT-AV1, in HandBrake and benchmarks (x264 HD and HWBot x265). x264 HD benchmark works in 32-bit mode (we did not manage to run 64-bit consistently on W10 and in general on newer OS’s it may be unstable and show errors in video). In HandBrake we use the x264 processor encoder for AVC and x265 for HEVC. Detailed settings of individual profiles can be found in the corresponding chapter 25. In addition to video, we also encode audio, where all the details are also stated in the chapter of these tests. Gamers who record their gameplay on video can also have to do with the performance of processor encoders. Therefore, we also test the performance of “processor broadcasting” in two popular applications OBS Studio and Xsplit.

We also have two chapters dedicated to photo editing performance. Adobe has a separate one, where we test Photoshop via PugetBench. However, we do not use PugetBench in Lightroom, because it requires various OS modifications for stable operation, and overall we rather avoided it (due to the higher risk of complications) and create our own test scenes. Both are CPU intensive, whether it’s exporting RAW files to 16-bit TIFF with ProPhotoRGB color space or generating 1:1 thumbnails of 42 lossless CR2 photos.

However, we also have several alternative photo editing applications in which we test CPU performance. These include Affinity Photo, in which we use a built-in benchmark, or XnViewMP for batch photo editing or ZPS X. Of the truly modern ones, there are three Topaz Labz applications that use AI algorithms. DeNoise AI, Gigapixel AI and Sharpen AI. Topaz Labs often and happily compares its results with Adobe applications (Photoshop and Lightroom) and boasts of better results. So we’ll see, maybe we’ll get into it from the image point of view sometime. In processor tests, however, we are primarily focused on performance.

We test compression and decompression performance in WinRAR, 7-Zip and Aida64 (Zlib) benchmarks, decryption in TrueCrypt and Aida64, where in addition to AES there are also SHA3 tests. In Aida64, we also test FPU in the chapter of mathematical calculations. From this category you may also be interested in the results of Stockfish 13 and the number of chess combinations achieved per unit time. We perform many tests that can be included in the category of mathematics in SPECworkstation 3.1. It is a set of professional applications extending to various simulations, such as LAMMPS or NAMD, which are molecular simulators. A detailed description of the tests from SPECworkstation 3.1 can be found at spec.org. We do not test 7-zip, Blender and HandBrake from the list for redundancy, because we test performance in them separately in applications. A detailed listing of SPECWS results usually represents times or fps, but we graph “SPEC ratio”, which represents gained points—higher means better.

Processor settings…

We test processors in the default settings, without active PBO2 (AMD) or ABT (Intel) technologies, but naturally with active XMP 2.0.

… and app updates

The tests should also take into account that, over time, individual updates may affect performance comparisons. Some applications are used in portable versions, which are not updated or can be kept on a stable version, but this is not the case for some others. Typically, games update over time. On the other hand, even intentional obsolescence (and testing something out of date that already behaves differently) would not be entirely the way to go.

In short, just take into account that the accuracy of the results you are comparing decreases a bit over time. To make this analysis easier for you, we indicate when each processor was tested. You can find this in the dialog box, where there is information about the test date of each processor. This dialog box appears in interactive graphs, just hover the mouse cursor over any bar.



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.

Methodology: how we measure power draw

Measuring CPU power consumption is relatively simple, much easier than with graphics cards. All power goes through one or two EPS cables. We also use two to increase the cross-section, which is suitable for high performance AMD processors up to sTR(X)4 or for Intel HEDT, and in fact almost for mainstream processors as well. We have Prova 15 current probes to measure current directly on the wires. This is a much more accurate and reliable way of measuring than relying on internal sensors.

The only limitation of our current probes may be when testing the most powerful processors. These already exceed the maximum range of 30 A, at which high accuracy is guaranteed. For most processors, the range is optimal (even for measuring a lower load, when the probes can be switched to a lower and more accurate range of 4 A), but we will test models with power consumption over 360 W on our own device, a prototype of which we have already built. Its measuring range will no longer be limiting, but for the time being we will be using the Prova probes in the near future.

The probes are properly set to zero and connected to a UNI-T UT71E multimeter before each measurement. It records samples of current values during the tests via the IR-USB interface and writes them in a table at one-second intervals. We can then create bar graphs with power consumption patterns. But we always write average values in bar graphs. Measurements take place in various load modes. The lowest represents an idle Windows 10 desktop. This measurement takes place on a system that had been idle for quite some time.

   

Audio encoding (FLAC) represents a higher load, but processors use only one core or one thread for this. Higher loads, where more cores are involved, are games. We test power consumption in F1 2020, Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Total War Saga: Troy in 1920 × 1080 px. In this resolution, the power consumption is usually the highest or at least similar to that in lower or higher resolutions, where in most cases the CPU power draw rather decreases due to its lower utilization.

Like most motherboard manufacturers, we too ignore the time limit for “Tau”, after which the power consumption is to be reduced from the PL2 boost limit (when it exceeds the TDP) to the TDP/PL1 value, recommended by Intel, in our tests. This means that neither the power draw nor the clock speed after 56 seconds of higher load does not decrease and the performance is kept stable with just small fluctuations. We had been considering whether or not to respect the Tau. In the end, we decided not to because the vast majority of users won’t either, and therefore the results and comparisons would be relatively uninteresting. The solution would be to test with and without a power limit, but this is no longer possible due to time requirements.

We will pay more attention to the behavior of PL2 in motherboard tests, where it makes more sense. We always use motherboards with extremely robust, efficient VRM, so that the losses on MOSFETs distort the measured results as little as possible and the test setups are powered by a high-end 1200 W BeQuiet! Dark Power Pro 12 power supply. It is strong enough to supply every processor, even with a fully loaded GeForce RTX 3080, and at the same time achieves above-standard efficiency even at lower load. For a complete overview of test setup components, see Chapter 5 of this article.



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.

Methodology: temperature and clock speed tests

When choosing a cooler, we eventually opted for Noctua NH-U14S. It has a high performance and at the same time there is also the TR4-SP3 variant designed for Threadripper processors. It differs only by the base, the radiator is otherwise the same, so it will be possible to test and compare all processors under the same conditions. The fan on the NH-U14S cooler is set to a maximum speed of 1,535 rpm during all tests.
Measurements always take place on a bench-wall in a wind tunnel which simulates a computer case, with the difference that we have more control over it.

System cooling consists of four Noctua NF-S12A PWM fans, which are in an equilibrium ratio of two at the inlet and two at the outlet. Their speed is set at a fixed 535 rpm, which is a relatively practical speed that is not needed to be exceeded. In short, this should be the optimal configuration based on our tests of various system cooling settings.

It is also important to maintain the same air temperature around the processors. Of course, this also changes with regard to how much heat a particular processor produces, but at the inlet of the tunnel it must always be the same for accurate comparisons. In our air-conditioned test lab, it is currently in the range of 21–21.3 °C.

Maintaining a constant inlet temperature is necessary not only for a proper comparison of processor temperatures, but especially for unbiased performance comparisons. Trend of clock speed and especially single-core boost depends on the temperature. In the summer at higher temperatures, processors may be slower in living spaces than in the winter.

For Intel processors, we register the maximum core temperature for each test, usually of all cores. These maximum values are then averaged and the result is represented by the final value in the graph. From the outputs of single-threaded load, we only pick the registered values from active cores (these are usually two and alternate during the test). It’s a little different with AMD processors. They don’t have temperature sensors for every core. In order for the procedure to be as methodically as possible similar to that applied on Intel processors, the average temperature of all cores is defined by the highest value reported by the CPU Tdie sensor (average). For single-threaded load, however, we already use a CPU sensor (Tctl/Tdie), which usually reports a slightly higher value, which better corresponds to the hotspots of one or two cores. But these values as well as the values from all internal sensors must be taken with a grain of salt, the accuracy of the sensors varies across processors.

Clock speed evaluation is more accurate, each core has its own sensor even on AMD processors. Unlike temperatures, we plot average clock speed values during tests in graphs. We monitor the temperature and clock speed of the processor cores in the same tests, in which we also measure the power consumption. And thus, gradually from the lowest load level on the desktop of idle Windows 10, through audio encoding (single-threaded load), gaming load in three games (F1 2020, Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Total War Saga: Troy), to a 10-minute load in Cinebench R23 and the most demanding video encoding with the x264 encoder in HandBrake.

To record the temperatures and clock speed of the processor cores, we use HWiNFO, in which sampling is set to two seconds. With the exception of audio encoding, the graphs always show the averages of all processor cores in terms of temperatures and clock speed. During audio encoding, the values from the loaded core are given.



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.

Test setup

Noctua NH-U14S cooler
Kingston Fury Beast memory (2× 16 GB, 5200 MHz/CL40)
MSI RTX 3080 Gaming X Trio graphics card
2× SSD Patriot Viper VPN100 (512 GB + 2 TB)
BeQuiet! Dark Power Pro 12 1200 W PSU

Test configuration
CPU coolerNoctua NH-U14S@12 V
Thermal compoundNoctua NT-H2
Motherboard *Acc. to processor: Asus ROG Strix Z790-E Gaming WiFi, MSI MEG X670E Ace, MEG X570 Ace, MEG Z690 Unify, MAG Z690 Tomahawk WiFi DDR4, Z590 Ace, MSI MEG X570 Ace alebo MSI MEG Z490 Ace
Memory (RAM)Acc. to platform: from DDR5 modules G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo (2× 16 GB, 6000 MHz/CL30) and Kingston Fury Beast (2× 16 GB, 5200 MHz/CL40) and DDR4 Patriot Blackout, (4× 8 GB, 3600 MHz/CL18)
Graphics cardMSI RTX 3080 Gaming X Trio w/o Resizable BAR
SSD2× Patriot Viper VPN100 (512 GB + 2 TB)
PSUBeQuiet! Dark Power Pro 12 (1200 W)
/* Here you can add custom CSS for the current table */ /* Lean more about CSS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascading_Style_Sheets */ /* To prevent the use of styles to other tables use "#supsystic-table-1847" as a base selector for example: #supsystic-table-1847 { ... } #supsystic-table-1847 tbody { ... } #supsystic-table-1847 tbody tr { ... } */
* We use the following BIOSes on motherboards. For Asus ROG Strix Z790-E Gaming WiFi v0502, MSI MEG X670E Ace v1.10NPRP, for MEG X570 Ace v1E, for MEG Z690 Unify v10, for MAG Z690 Tomahawk WiFi DDR4 v11, for MEG Z590 Ace v1.14 and for MEG Z490 Ace v17.

Note: The graphics drivers we use are Nvidia GeForce 466.77 and the Windows 10 OS build is 19045 at the time of testing.

Processors of other platforms are tested on MSI MEG Z690 Unify, MAG Z490 Tomahawk WiFi DDR4, Z590 Ace and Z490 Ace motherboards, MEG Z690 Unify (all Intel) and MEG X570 Ace, MEG X670E Ace (AMD).

      

      

On platforms supporting DDR5 memory, we use two different sets of modules. For more powerful processors with an “X” (AMD) or “K” (Intel) in the name, we use the faster G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo memory (2×16 GB, 6000 MHz/CL30). In the case of cheaper processors (without X or K at the end of the name), the slower Kingston Fury Beast modules (2×16 GB, 5200 MHz/CL40). But this is more or less just symbolic, the bandwidth is very high for both kits, it is not a bottleneck, and the difference in processor performance is very small, practically negligible, across the differently fast memory kits.



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.

3DMark

We use 3DMark Professional for the tests and the following tests: Night Raid (DirectX 12), Fire Strike (DirectX 11) and Time Spy (DirectX 12). In the graphs you will find partial CPU scores, combined scores, but also graphics scores. You can find out to what extent the given processor limits the graphics card.









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.

Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Low; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   



Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset Low; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: low; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   



Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.



Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Ultra High; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   


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.

Borderlands 3

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Very Low; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   



Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: None; test scene: built-in benchmark.



Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   



Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Ultra; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   




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.

Counter-Strike: GO

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; lowest graphics settings and w/o Anti-Aliasing, API DirectX 9; Test platform script with Dust 2 map tour.

   



Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; high graphics settings and w/o Anti-Aliasingu, API DirectX 9; Test platform script with Dust 2 map tour.

   



Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; high graphics settings; 4× MSAA, API DirectX 9; Test platform script with Dust 2 map tour.



Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; very high graphics settings; 4× MSAA, API DirectX 9; Test platform script with Dust 2 map tour.

   




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.

Cyberpunk 2077

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Low; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: custom (Little China)

   



Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: custom (Little China).

   



Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: custom (Little China).



Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Ultra; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: custom (Little China).

   




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.

DOOM Eternal

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Low; API Vulkan; extra settings Present From Compute: off, Motion Blur: Low, Depth of Field Anti-Aliasing: off; test scene: custom.

   



Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API Vulkan; extra settings Present From Compute: on, Motion Blur: High, Depth of Field Anti-Aliasing: off; test scene: custom.

   



Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API Vulkan; extra settings Present From Compute: on, Motion Blur: High, Depth of Field Anti-Aliasing: on; test scene: custom.



Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Ultra Nightmare; API Vulkan; extra settings Present From Compute: on, Motion Blur: High, Depth of Field Anti-Aliasing: on; test scene: custom.

   




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.

F1 2020

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Ultra Low; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: off, Anisotropic Filtering: off; test scene: built-in benchmark (Australia, Clear/Dry, Cycle).

   



Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: off, Skidmarks Blending: off; test scene: built-in benchmark (Australia, Clear/Dry, Cycle).

   



Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: TAA, Skidmarks Blending: off; test scene: built-in benchmark (Australia, Clear/Dry, Cycle).



Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Ultra High; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: TAA, Skidmarks Blending: off; test scene: built-in benchmark (Australia, Clear/Dry, Cycle).




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.

Metro Exodus

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Low; API DirectX 12; no extra settings test scene: built-in benchmark.



Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.



Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.



Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Extreme; API DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.


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.

   




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.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Lowest; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: off; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   



Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: off; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   



Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: TAA; test scene: built-in benchmark.



Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Highest; API DirectX 12; extra settings Anti-Aliasing: TAA; test scene: built-in benchmark.




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.

Total War Saga: Troy

Test environment: resolution 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset Low; API DirectX 11; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.



Test environment: resolution 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 11; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.



Test environment: resolution 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset High; API DirectX 11; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.



strong>Test environment: resolution 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset Ultra; API DirectX 11; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.




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.

Overall gaming performance

To calculate average gaming performance, we normalized the Intel Core i7-11900K processor. The percentage differences of all other processors are based on this, with each of the games contributing an equal weight to the final result. To see exactly what the formula we use to arrive at each value looks like, see „New average CPU score measuring method“.










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.

Gaming performance per euro






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.

PCMark








Geekbench




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.

Speedometer (2.0) and Octane (2.0)

Test environment: We’re using a portable version of Google Chrome (91.0.472.101) 64-bit so that real-time results are not affected by browser updates. GPU hardware acceleration is enabled as each user has in the default settings.



Note: The values in the graphs represent the average of the points obtained in the subtasks, which are grouped according to their nature into seven categories (Core language features, Memory and GC, Strings and arrays, Virtual machine and GC, Loading and Parsing, Bit and Math operations and Compiler and GC latency).









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.

Cinebench R20


Cinebench R23



Blender@Cycles

Test environment: We use well-known projects BMW (510 tiles) and Classroom (2040 tiles) and renderer Cycles. Render settings are set to None, with which all the work falls on the CPU.



LuxRender (SPECworkstation 3.1)



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.

Adobe Premiere Pro (PugetBench)

Test environment: set of PugetBench tests. App version of Adobe Premiere Pro is 15.2.
































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.

DaVinci Resolve Studio (PugetBench)

Test environment: set of PugetBench tests, test type: standard. App version of DaVinci Resolve Studio is 17.2.1 (build 12).























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.

Graphics effects: Adobe After Effects

Test environment: set of PugetBench tests. App version of Adobe After Effects is 18.2.1.


































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.

HandBrake

   

Test environment: For video conversion we’re using a 4K video LG Demo Snowboard with a 43,9 Mb/s bitrate. AVC (x264) and HEVC (x265) profiles are set for high quality and encoder profiles are “slow”. HandBrake version is 1.3.3 (2020061300).

Disclaimer: For big.LITTLE-based processors, there is a missing result in some tests. This is because they didn’t scale properly with P cores and the achieved performance was too low. In such cases it is indeed possible to force performance on all cores, but this does not happen by default at the user level. To avoid creating the illusion in some cases that measured results such as those presented in the graphs are normally achieved, we omit these. However, these are a negligible fraction of the total set of test results.

x264 and x265 benchmarks




SVT-AV1

Test environment: We are encoding a short, publicly available sample park_joy_2160p50.y4m: uncompressed video 4096 × 2160 px, 8bit, 50 fps. Length is 585 frames with encoding quality set to 6 which makes the encoding still relatively slow. This test can make use of the AVX2 i AVX-512 instructions.

Version: SVT-AV1 Encoder Lib v0.8.7-61-g685afb2d via FFMpeg N-104429-g069f7831a2-20211026 (64bit)
Build from: https://github.com/BtbN/FFmpeg-Builds/releases
Command line: ffmpeg.exe -i “park_joy_2160p50.y4m” -c:v libsvtav1 -rc 0 -qp 55 -preset 6 -f null output.webm



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.

Audio encoding

Test environment: Audio encoding is done using command line encoders, we measure the time it takes for the conversion to finish. The same 42-minute long 16-bit WAV file (stereo) with 44.1 kHz is always used (Love Over Gold by Dire Straits album rip in a single audio file).

Encoder settings are selected to achieve maximum or near maximum compression. The bitrate is relatively high, with the exception of lossless FLAC of about 200 kb/s.

Note: These tests measure single-thread performance.

FLAC: reference encoder 1.3.2, 64-bit build. Launch options: flac.exe -s -8 -m -e -p -f

MP3: encoder lame3.100.1, 64-bit build (Intel 19 Compiler) from RareWares. Launch options: lame.exe -S -V 0 -q 0

AAC: uses Apple QuickTime libraries, invoked through the application from the command line, QAAC 2.72, 64-bit build, Intel 19 Compiler (does not require installation of the whole Apple package). Launch options: qaac64.exe -V 100 -s -q 2

Opus: reference encoder 1.3.1, Launch options: opusenc.exe –comp 10 –quiet –vbr –bitrate 192



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.

Broadcasting

Test environment: Applications OBS Studio and Xsplit. We’re using the built-in benchmark (scene Australia, Clear/Dry, Cycle) in F1 2020, in a resolution of 2560 × 1440 px and the same graphics settings, as with standard game performance tests. Thanks to this, we can measure the performance decrease if you record your gameplay with the x264 software encoder while playing. The output is 2560 × 1440 px at 60 fps.






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.

Adobe Photoshop (PugetBench)

Test environment: set of PugetBench tests. App version of Adobe Photoshop is 22.4.2.


















Adobe Lightroom Classic

Test environment: With the settings above, we export 42 uncompressed .CR2 (RAW Canon) photos with a size of 20 Mpx. Then we create 1:1 previews from them, which also represent one of the most processor intensive tasks in Lightroom. The version of Adobe Lightroom Classic is 10.3.



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.

Affinity Photo (benchmark)

Test environment: built-in benchmark.





Topaz Labs AI apps

Topaz DeNoise AI, Gigapixel AI and Sharpen AI. These single-purpose applications are used for restoration of low-quality photos. Whether it is high noise (caused by higher ISO), raster level (typically after cropping) or when something needs extra focus. The AI performance is always used.

Test settings for Topaz Labs applications. DeNoise AI, Gigapixel AI and Sharpen AI, left to right. Each application has one of the three windows

Test environment: As part of batch editing, 42 photos with a lower resolution of 1920 × 1280 px are processed, with the settings from the images above. DeNoise AI is in version 3.1.2, Gigapixel in 5.5.2 and Sharpen AI in 3.1.2.



The processor is used for acceleration (and high RAM allocation), but you can also switch to the GPU

XnViewMP

Test environment: XnViewMP is finally a photo-editor for which you don’t have to pay. At the same time, it uses hardware very efficiently. In order to achieve more reasonable comparison times, we had to create an archive of up to 1024 photos, where we reduce the original resolution of 5472 × 3648 px to 1980 × 1280 px and filters with automatic contrast enhancement and noise reduction are also being applied during this process. We use 64-bit portable version 0.98.4.

Zoner Photo Studio X

Test environment: In Zoner Photo Studio X we convert 42 .CR2 (RAW Canon) photos to JPEG while keeping the original resolution (5472 × 3648 px) at the lowest possible compression, with the ZPS X profile ”high quality for archival”.



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.

WinRAR 6.01

7-Zip 19.00






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.

TrueCrypt 7.1a






Aida64 (AES, SHA3)


Please note: The very low, inadequate performance in Aida64 in the AES test for the Intel Core i3-13100F and Intel Core i5-13400F processors can be attributed to application code that is not optimized for them. The (de)encryption performance of these processors is otherwise adequate for their hardware capabilities, as shown by the test results from TrueCrypt.



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.

Disclaimer: For big.LITTLE-based processors, there is a missing result in some tests. This is because they didn’t scale properly with P cores and the achieved performance was too low. In such cases it is indeed possible to force performance on all cores, but this does not happen by default at the user level. To avoid creating the illusion in some cases that measured results such as those presented in the graphs are normally achieved, we omit these. However, these are a negligible fraction of the total set of test results.

Y-cruncher



Stockfish 13

Test environment: Host for the Stockfish 13 engine is a chess app Arena 2.0.1, build 2399.


Aida64, FPU tests



Please note: The very low, inadequate to hardware capabilities performance in Aida64 in FPU tests is achieved by Intel Core i3-13100F and Intel Core i5-13400F due to probably unoptimized application code for these processors.

FSI (SPECworkstation 3.1)



Kirchhoff migration (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Python36 (SPECworkstation 3.1)



SRMP (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Octave (SPECworkstation 3.1)


FFTW (SPECworkstation 3.1)



Convolution (SPECworkstation 3.1)

CalculiX (SPECworkstation 3.1)



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.

RodiniaLifeSci (SPECworkstation 3.1)





WPCcfd (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Poisson (SPECworkstation 3.1)

LAMMPS (SPECworkstation 3.1)





NAMD (SPECworkstation 3.1)





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.

Memory tests…




… and cache (L1, L2, L3)












Note: The L3 memory results, at least with our component configuration, could not be measured in AIDA64, the corresponding application windows remained empty. Tested with older versions as well as with the latest one (6.60.5900).



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.

Processor power draw curve



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.

Disclaimer: For big.LITTLE-based processors, there is a missing result in some tests. This is because they didn’t scale properly with P cores and the achieved performance was too low. In such cases it is indeed possible to force performance on all cores, but this does not happen by default at the user level. To avoid creating the illusion in some cases that measured results such as those presented in the graphs are normally achieved, we omit these. However, these are a negligible fraction of the total set of test results.

Average processor power draw









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.

Performance per watt





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.

Disclaimer: For big.LITTLE-based processors, there is a missing result in some tests. This is because they didn’t scale properly with P cores and the achieved performance was too low. In such cases it is indeed possible to force performance on all cores, but this does not happen by default at the user level. To avoid creating the illusion in some cases that measured results such as those presented in the graphs are normally achieved, we omit these. However, these are a negligible fraction of the total set of test results.

Achieved CPU clock speed








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.

Disclaimer: For big.LITTLE-based processors, there is a missing result in some tests. This is because they didn’t scale properly with P cores and the achieved performance was too low. In such cases it is indeed possible to force performance on all cores, but this does not happen by default at the user level. To avoid creating the illusion in some cases that measured results such as those presented in the graphs are normally achieved, we omit these. However, these are a negligible fraction of the total set of test results.

CPU temperature









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.

Conclusion

This processor may or may not be the unbeatable choice, and in many situations the competing Ryzen 5 7600 makes more sense. Traditionally, a detailed sub-feature analysis is necessary to properly evaluate when a particular processor is suitable.

The key change from its predecessor (Ci5-12400F) is the activation of four E cores, due to which multi-threading performance has been significantly increased.In this regard, the Core i5-13400(F) has a fairly crushing speed advantage over the Ryzen 5 7600, while being the significantly more efficient processor at the same time. Notably, there is no cheaper option for a computing environment than the Core i5-13400(F). A 16-thread Raptor Lake, be it built on an Alder Lake chip, may thus appeal to technical fields students, for example, for whom any saving is good.

In terms of single-threaded performance, it’s already “worse” with the Core i5-13400(F), at least compared to the AMD Ryzen 5 processors. These reach significantly higher clock speeds on a single core (R5 7600 by up to 600 MHz, for example) and the Core i5 lags far behind here. Due to only supporting Turbo Boost 2.0 there is a very big difference with the Ci5-13400(F) even compared to the Ci5-13600K (with TB 3.0), which also has six P cores. These are faster always, the all-core boost is abysmally faster, by more than 1 GHz (in favor of the “K” Core i5 Raptor Lake).

And now to the most controversial topic for the Ci5-13400(F) – gaming. Their running can be even slower than on the Ci5-12400(F), and you don’t have to go far for the reason, which is the presence of “slow” E cores. Games that don’t use more than six cores in a particular setup, or don’t run more demanding tasks on E cores, perform better on the Ci5-13400(F). Although only by a bit, because the intergenerational gain on P cores is more or less symbolic (100 MHz). The always higher gaming performance of the Ci5-13400F (than the 12400F) is, for example, in Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla, in Borderlands 3 or in Metro Exodus.

But then there are games where lower gaming performance is achieved compared to the Ci5-12400(F), especially in practice. In 720p@low, which is an inherently synthetic load, the Ci5-13400F still usually achieves better results (up to 8% on average), but at higher resolutions with higher detail, i.e. under different workloads, the situation sometimes gets a bit more complicated.

Where the game uses and heavily loads more than six cores, fps drops often occur compared to the Ci5-12400F. There are quite a few such cases where the Ci5-13400(F) is slower in gaming. From our test games, it’s CS:GO, DOOM Eternal, F1 2020, Shadow of the Tomb Raider and lastly Total War Saga: Troy. Of course, these are not dramatic drops, but on average it comes out to minus 3–6%. With more powerful graphics cards (than the test RTX 3080) this, shall we say, variance of deterioration can be even wider, but also (with slower graphics) smaller, to vanishing. It’s just such a small warning to those who would consider, for example, swapping the Ci5-12400(F) for the Ci5-13400(F), which is quite convenient since you’re making do with the same motherboard and memory. For higher multithreading performance this will be a good move, but for select games it may not have such a positive impact. Colleagues from Overclock3D, for example, have come to similar conclusions, where in every other game the Ci5-13400 is slower than the Ci5-12400.

Aside from the rare titles where the Core i5-13400(F) has the edge, the Ryzen 5 7600 can be considered a more “gaming” and reliable processor overall. It is also more advantageous in terms of energy efficiency, at least compared to the Ci5-13400F stepping C0 (SRMBN), while the other B0 variant (made by Intel 7 Ultra process) may or may not be different. However, the heat dissipation from both variants will be fast, as they are built on large chips, and thus at this power draw (up to 100W) a simpler, cheaper cooler will always be enough to achieve quiet operation.

It should also be pointed out, in a good sense, that there has been a significant drop in idle power draw. The Ci5-13400(F) drops the multiplier for P cores down to 4 (400 MHz) while the minimum multiplier for the Ci5-12400(F) is 8 (800 MHz). For lower clock speeds, a less intensive power supply is sufficient, resulting in lower power draw. Core i5-13600K (and open multiplier models in general) are no longer concerned. Those max out at 800 MHz idle, and that may be in order to have faster responses for Turbo Boost 3.0. So we may have finally found at least something positive about TB 2.0.

We are giving the “Smart buy!” award to the Core i5-13400F mainly for its excellent price/multi-threaded performance ratio. But unless you can take advantage of this, the Ryzen 5 7600 is more attractive in most scenarios. And the cheaper the boards get, and there’s s promise of lower prices, the more so.

Intel Core i5-13400F
+ As many as 10 cores and 16 threads
+ ... at higher power efficiency on top of that
+ Attractive price/performance ratio (especially multi-threaded)
+ High single-thread performance
+ Vysoký jednovláknový výkon
+ High power efficiency regardless of load intensity
+ Extremely low idle power draw
+ Very high performance per clock
+ Finally, the modern 7 nm manufacturing node
+ Low temperatures
+ Sometimes top-notch gaming performance...
- ... but in some games, due to the E cores slowing it down, lower than the Core i5-12400(F)
- Single-threaded performance significantly weaker than Ryzen 5 7600
- Does not have an integrated GPU
Approximate retail price: 196 EUR
/* Here you can add custom CSS for the current table */ /* Lean more about CSS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascading_Style_Sheets */ /* To prevent the use of styles to other tables use "#supsystic-table-2077" as a base selector for example: #supsystic-table-2077 { ... } #supsystic-table-2077 tbody { ... } #supsystic-table-2077 tbody tr { ... } */

English translation and edit by Jozef Dudáš

We are grateful to Datacomp e-shop for cooperation in providing the tested hardware

Special thanks also to Blackmagic Design (for DaVinci Resolve Studio license), Topaz Labs (for DeNoise AI, Gigapixel AI and Sharpen AI licenses) and Zoner (for Photo Studio X license)