Ryzen 7 7800X3D vs Core i5-13400F

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i5-13400F
2023
10 cores / 16 threads, 65 Watt
16.31
Ryzen 7 7800X3D
2023
8 cores / 16 threads, 120 Watt
22.17
+35.9%

Ryzen 7 7800X3D outperforms i5-13400F by a substantial 36% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i5-13400F and Ryzen 7 7800X3D processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking378214
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation19.1937.47
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Architecture codenameRaptor Lake-SRaphael (Zen4)
Release date4 January 2023 (1 year ago)4 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$196$449
Current price$675 (3.4x MSRP)$520 (1.2x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 7 7800X3D has 95% better value for money than i5-13400F.

Detailed specifications

Core i5-13400F and Ryzen 7 7800X3D 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 cores10 (Deca-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads1616
Base clock speed2.5 GHz4.4 GHz
Boost clock speed4.6 GHz5 GHz
L1 cache80K (per core)64K (per core)
L2 cache1.25 MB (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache20 MB (shared)96 MB (shared)
Chip lithographyIntel 7 nm5 nm
Die size257 mm271 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C89 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °C61 °C
Number of transistorsno data6,570 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplierNoYes

Compatibility

Information on Core i5-13400F and Ryzen 7 7800X3D 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
SocketFCLGA1700AM5
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt120 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i5-13400F and Ryzen 7 7800X3D. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX286x MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A,-64, AMD-V, AES, AVX, AVX2, AVX512, BMI1, BMI2, F16C, FMA3, AMD64, EVP, AMD-V, SMAP, SMEP, SMT SHA, XFR2, Precision Boost 2
AES-NI++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Speed Shift+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
TSX+no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+no data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0-no data
StatusLaunchedno data

Security technologies

Core i5-13400F and Ryzen 7 7800X3D technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data
Secure Key+no data
OS Guard+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i5-13400F and Ryzen 7 7800X3D are enumerated here.

AMD-Vno data+
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i5-13400F and Ryzen 7 7800X3D. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR5, DDR4DDR5-5200
Maximum memory size192 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth76.8 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i5-13400F and Ryzen 7 7800X3D.

PCIe version5.0 and 4.05.0
PCI Express lanes2024

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.

i5-13400F 16.31
Ryzen 7 7800X3D 22.17
+35.9%

Ryzen 7 7800X3D outperforms Core i5-13400F by 36% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

i5-13400F 25224
Ryzen 7 7800X3D 34289
+35.9%

Ryzen 7 7800X3D outperforms Core i5-13400F by 36% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

i5-13400F 2289
Ryzen 7 7800X3D 2716
+18.7%

Ryzen 7 7800X3D outperforms Core i5-13400F by 19% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

i5-13400F 10783
Ryzen 7 7800X3D 15143
+40.4%

Ryzen 7 7800X3D outperforms Core i5-13400F by 40% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

i5-13400F 8689
+8.3%
Ryzen 7 7800X3D 8026

Core i5-13400F outperforms Ryzen 7 7800X3D by 8% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

i5-13400F 51113
Ryzen 7 7800X3D 51950
+1.6%

Ryzen 7 7800X3D outperforms Core i5-13400F by 2% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

i5-13400F 13989
Ryzen 7 7800X3D 16892
+20.8%

Ryzen 7 7800X3D outperforms Core i5-13400F by 21% in 3DMark06 CPU.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

i5-13400F 3.27
Ryzen 7 7800X3D 2.44
+34%

Core i5-13400F outperforms Ryzen 7 7800X3D by 34% in wPrime 32.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

i5-13400F 27
Ryzen 7 7800X3D 33
+21.9%

Ryzen 7 7800X3D outperforms Core i5-13400F by 22% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

Benchmark coverage: 15%

i5-13400F 2364
Ryzen 7 7800X3D 2879
+21.8%

Ryzen 7 7800X3D outperforms Core i5-13400F by 22% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

i5-13400F 252
Ryzen 7 7800X3D 282
+11.7%

Ryzen 7 7800X3D outperforms Core i5-13400F by 12% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

i5-13400F 3.06
Ryzen 7 7800X3D 3.43
+12.1%

Ryzen 7 7800X3D outperforms Core i5-13400F by 12% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

i5-13400F 12.2
Ryzen 7 7800X3D 15.3
+25.4%

Ryzen 7 7800X3D outperforms Core i5-13400F by 25% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

i5-13400F 8602
Ryzen 7 7800X3D 16585
+92.8%

Ryzen 7 7800X3D outperforms Core i5-13400F by 93% in WinRAR 4.0.

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.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

i5-13400F 137
Ryzen 7 7800X3D 169
+23.7%

Ryzen 7 7800X3D outperforms Core i5-13400F by 24% in x264 encoding pass 2.

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.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

i5-13400F 315
Ryzen 7 7800X3D 344
+9.4%

Ryzen 7 7800X3D outperforms Core i5-13400F by 9% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 16.31 22.17
Physical cores 10 8
Cost $196 $449
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 120 Watt

The Ryzen 7 7800X3D is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i5-13400F in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i5-13400F and Ryzen 7 7800X3D, 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 i5-13400F
Core i5-13400F
AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D
Ryzen 7 7800X3D

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.


4.1 2674 votes

Rate Core i5-13400F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 1323 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 7800X3D on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i5-13400F or Ryzen 7 7800X3D, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.