i9-13900HX vs i5-9400F

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i5-9400F
2019
6 cores / 6 threads, 65 Watt
5.96
Core i9-13900HX
2023
24 cores / 32 threads, 55 Watt
27.70
+365%

Core i9-13900HX outperforms Core i5-9400F by a whopping 365% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i5-9400F and Core i9-13900HX processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1108175
Place by popularity24not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.42no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesIntel Core i5Intel Raptor Lake-HX
Power efficiency8.6847.66
Architecture codenameCoffee Lake-R (2018−2019)Raptor Lake-HX (2023)
Release date8 January 2019 (5 years ago)4 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$182$668

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Core i5-9400F and Core i9-13900HX 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 cores6 (Hexa-Core)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads632
Base clock speed2.9 GHz2.2 GHz
Boost clock speed4.1 GHz5.4 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier29no data
L1 cache64K (per core)80K (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)2 MB (per core)
L3 cache9 MB (shared)36 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nmIntel 7 nm
Die size149 mm2257 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °C72 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++

Compatibility

Information on Core i5-9400F and Core i9-13900HX 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketFCLGA1151FCBGA1964
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt55 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i5-9400F and Core i9-13900HX. 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++
FMA-+
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-+
TSX-+
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Accessno data+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Core i5-9400F and Core i9-13900HX technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-+
EDB+no data
Secure Key++
MPX+-
Identity Protection+-
SGXYes with Intel® MEno data
OS Guard++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i5-9400F and Core i9-13900HX are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i5-9400F and Core i9-13900HX. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2666DDR4, DDR5
Maximum memory size128 GB192 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth42.671 GB/s89.6 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel UHD Graphics for 13th Gen Intel Processors
Quick Sync Video-+
Graphics max frequencyno data1.65 GHz
Execution Unitsno data32

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core i5-9400F and Core i9-13900HX integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data4

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Core i5-9400F and Core i9-13900HX integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096 x 2160 @ 60Hz
Max resolution over eDPno data5120 x 3200 @ 120Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Core i5-9400F and Core i9-13900HX integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12.1
OpenGLno data4.6

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i5-9400F and Core i9-13900HX.

PCIe version3.05.0 and 4.0
PCI Express lanes1620

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.

i5-9400F 5.96
i9-13900HX 27.70
+365%

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.

i5-9400F 9467
i9-13900HX 43998
+365%

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.

i5-9400F 6490
i9-13900HX 11700
+80.3%

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.

i5-9400F 31523
i9-13900HX 79300
+152%

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.

i5-9400F 6.76
i9-13900HX 2.6
+160%

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.

i5-9400F 11
i9-13900HX 52
+364%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

i5-9400F 984
i9-13900HX 4487
+356%

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.

i5-9400F 173
i9-13900HX 295
+70.5%

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.

i5-9400F 1.95
i9-13900HX 3.66
+87.7%

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.

i5-9400F 5.2
i9-13900HX 17
+227%

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.

i5-9400F 5794
i9-13900HX 12916
+123%

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.  

i5-9400F 64
i9-13900HX 218
+240%

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.  

i5-9400F 234
i9-13900HX 388
+65.7%

Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core

i5-9400F 5715
i9-13900HX 19982
+250%

Blender(-)

i5-9400F 469
+311%
i9-13900HX 114

Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core

i5-9400F 1139
i9-13900HX 2036
+78.8%

7-Zip Single

i5-9400F 4678
i9-13900HX 6893
+47.3%

7-Zip

i5-9400F 25639
i9-13900HX 114430
+346%

WebXPRT 3

i5-9400F 211
i9-13900HX 322
+52.6%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.96 27.70
Recency 8 January 2019 4 January 2023
Physical cores 6 24
Threads 6 32
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 55 Watt

i9-13900HX has a 364.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, 300% more physical cores and 433.3% more threads, and 18.2% lower power consumption.

The Core i9-13900HX is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i5-9400F in performance tests.

Note that Core i5-9400F is a desktop processor while Core i9-13900HX is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i5-9400F and Core i9-13900HX, 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 i5-9400F
Core i5-9400F
Intel Core i9-13900HX
Core i9-13900HX

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.


4.9 56769 votes

Rate Core i5-9400F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 508 votes

Rate Core i9-13900HX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i5-9400F or Core i9-13900HX, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.