i5-10400F vs i5-13500

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i5-13500
2023
14 cores / 20 threads, 65 Watt
20.02
+144%
Core i5-10400F
2020
6 cores / 12 threads, 65 Watt
8.20

Core i5-13500 outperforms Core i5-10400F by a whopping 144% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i5-13500 and Core i5-10400F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking278917
Place by popularitynot in top-10012
Cost-effectiveness evaluation61.0023.08
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency29.1511.94
Architecture codenameRaptor Lake-S (2023−2024)Comet Lake (2020)
Release date4 January 2023 (1 year ago)30 April 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$242$155

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

i5-13500 has 164% better value for money than i5-10400F.

Detailed specifications

Core i5-13500 and Core i5-10400F basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores14 (Tetradeca-Core)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads2012
Base clock speed2.5 GHz2.9 GHz
Boost clock speed4.8 GHz4.3 GHz
Bus rate154 MHz8 GT/s
L1 cache80K (per core)64K (per core)
L2 cache1.25 MB (per core)256K (per core)
L3 cache24 MB (shared)12 MB (shared)
Chip lithographyIntel 7 nm14 nm
Die size257 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature100 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °C72 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++

Compatibility

Information on Core i5-13500 and Core i5-10400F compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11
SocketFCLGA1700FCLGA1200
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i5-13500 and Core i5-10400F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shift+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.02.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX+-
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
SIPP+-
Turbo Boost Max 3.0--
Deep Learning Boost+-

Security technologies

Core i5-13500 and Core i5-10400F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++
Secure Key++
Identity Protection-+
SGXno dataYes with Intel® ME
OS Guard++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i5-13500 and Core i5-10400F are enumerated here.

VT-d++
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i5-13500 and Core i5-10400F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR5-4800, DDR4-3200DDR4
Maximum memory size192 GB128 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth76.8 GB/s41.6 GB/s
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel UHD Graphics 770no data
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency1.55 GHzno data
Execution Units32no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core i5-13500 and Core i5-10400F integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported4no data

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Core i5-13500 and Core i5-10400F integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

Max resolution over HDMI 1.44096 x 2160 @ 60Hzno data
Max resolution over eDP5120 x 3200 @ 120Hzno data
Max resolution over DisplayPort7680 x 4320 @ 60Hzno data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Core i5-13500 and Core i5-10400F integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX12no data
OpenGL4.5no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i5-13500 and Core i5-10400F.

PCIe version5.0 and 4.03.0
PCI Express lanes1616

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

i5-13500 20.02
+144%
i5-10400F 8.20

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

i5-13500 31807
+144%
i5-10400F 13029

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

i5-13500 2426
+66.7%
i5-10400F 1455

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

i5-13500 12288
+113%
i5-10400F 5774

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

i5-13500 8875
+32.1%
i5-10400F 6719

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

i5-13500 49300
+34.8%
i5-10400F 36564

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

i5-13500 4.02
+55.5%
i5-10400F 6.25

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

i5-13500 28
+97.6%
i5-10400F 14

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

i5-13500 2405
+80.6%
i5-10400F 1332

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

i5-13500 256
+42.2%
i5-10400F 180

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

i5-13500 3.11
+53.2%
i5-10400F 2.03

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

i5-13500 135
+65.7%
i5-10400F 81

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

i5-13500 306
+33.9%
i5-10400F 229

Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core

i5-13500 10322
+62.2%
i5-10400F 6365

Blender(-)

i5-13500 223
i5-10400F 332
+49.1%

Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core

i5-13500 1805
+48%
i5-10400F 1220

7-Zip Single

i5-13500 5887
+16.3%
i5-10400F 5064

7-Zip

i5-13500 55528
+51.2%
i5-10400F 36731

WebXPRT 3

i5-13500 266
+23.7%
i5-10400F 215

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 20.02 8.20
Recency 4 January 2023 30 April 2020
Physical cores 14 6
Threads 20 12

i5-13500 has a 144.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and 133.3% more physical cores and 66.7% more threads.

The Core i5-13500 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i5-10400F in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i5-13500 and Core i5-10400F, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Core i5-13500
Core i5-13500
Intel Core i5-10400F
Core i5-10400F

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


4.5 1260 votes

Rate Core i5-13500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 13611 votes

Rate Core i5-10400F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i5-13500 or Core i5-10400F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.