Core i7-2715QE vs Core i5-13400
Aggregate performance score
i5-13400 outperforms i7-2715QE by a whopping 619% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core i5-13400 and Core i7-2715QE processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 456 | 1848 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 45.85 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Core i7 |
| Architecture codename | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) |
| Release date | 4 January 2023 (1 year ago) | 3 January 2011 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $221 | $378 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Core i5-13400 and Core i7-2715QE 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 cores | 10 (Deca-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 16 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 2.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.6 GHz | 2.1 GHz |
| Bus support | no data | 4 × 5 GT/s |
| L1 cache | 0.1 MB | 256 KB |
| L2 cache | 9.5 MB | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 20 MB | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 257 mm2 | 216 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 72 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 1160 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Core i5-13400 and Core i7-2715QE 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 configuration | 1 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | LGA 1700 | Intel BGA1023 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 45 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i5-13400 and Core i7-2715QE. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | no data | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| TSX | + | no data |
Security technologies
Core i5-13400 and Core i7-2715QE technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i5-13400 and Core i7-2715QE are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i5-13400 and Core i7-2715QE. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4, DDR5 Dual-channel | unknown Dual-channel |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 16 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 25.598 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | no data | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Intel UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) | Intel HD Graphics 3000 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i5-13400 and Core i7-2715QE.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | no data |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 14.95 | 2.08 |
| Integrated graphics card | 15.67 | 0.66 |
| Recency | 4 January 2023 | 3 January 2011 |
| Physical cores | 10 | 4 |
| Threads | 16 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 45 Watt |
i5-13400 has a 618.8% higher aggregate performance score, 2274.2% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 12 years, 150% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 220% more advanced lithography process.
i7-2715QE, on the other hand, has 44.4% lower power consumption.
The Core i5-13400 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i7-2715QE in performance tests.
Note that Core i5-13400 is a desktop processor while Core i7-2715QE is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i5-13400 and Core i7-2715QE, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
