Core i5-13400F vs Ryzen 5 1500X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 5 1500X
2017
4 cores / 8 threads, 65 Watt
5.88
Core i5-13400F
2023
10 cores / 16 threads, 65 Watt
16.30
+177%

Core i5-13400F outperforms Ryzen 5 1500X by a whopping 177% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 5 1500X and Core i5-13400F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking1043374
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.4812.47
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesAMD Ryzen 5no data
Architecture codenameZen (2017−2020)Raptor Lake-S
Release date11 April 2017 (7 years ago)4 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$189$196
Current price$111 (0.6x MSRP)$1066 (5.4x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

i5-13400F has 32% better value for money than Ryzen 5 1500X.

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 5 1500X and Core i5-13400F 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)10 (Deca-Core)
Threads816
Base clock speed3.5 GHz2.5 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz4.6 GHz
L1 cache96K (per core)80K (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)1.25 MB (per core)
L3 cache16 MB (shared)20 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nmIntel 7 nm
Die size192 mm2257 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data72 °C
Number of transistors4,800 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierYesNo

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 5 1500X and Core i5-13400F 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
SocketAM4FCLGA1700
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 5 1500X and Core i5-13400F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsXFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMTIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
TSXno data+
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoringno data+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data-
Statusno dataLaunched

Security technologies

Ryzen 5 1500X and Core i5-13400F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 5 1500X and Core i5-13400F are enumerated here.

AMD-V+no data
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 5 1500X and Core i5-13400F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR5, DDR4
Maximum memory size64 GB192 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth42.671 GB/s76.8 GB/s
ECC memory support+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 5 1500X and Core i5-13400F.

PCIe version3.05.0 and 4.0
PCI Express lanes2020

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.

Ryzen 5 1500X 5.88
i5-13400F 16.30
+177%

Core i5-13400F outperforms Ryzen 5 1500X by 177% based on our aggregated 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%

Ryzen 5 1500X 9098
i5-13400F 25210
+177%

Core i5-13400F outperforms Ryzen 5 1500X by 177% 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%

Ryzen 5 1500X 1105
i5-13400F 2289
+107%

Core i5-13400F outperforms Ryzen 5 1500X by 107% 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%

Ryzen 5 1500X 3645
i5-13400F 10771
+196%

Core i5-13400F outperforms Ryzen 5 1500X by 196% 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%

Ryzen 5 1500X 4573
i5-13400F 8689
+90%

Core i5-13400F outperforms Ryzen 5 1500X by 90% 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%

Ryzen 5 1500X 20186
i5-13400F 51113
+153%

Core i5-13400F outperforms Ryzen 5 1500X by 153% 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%

Ryzen 5 1500X 7403
i5-13400F 13989
+89%

Core i5-13400F outperforms Ryzen 5 1500X by 89% 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%

Ryzen 5 1500X 6.9
i5-13400F 3.27
+111%

Ryzen 5 1500X outperforms Core i5-13400F by 111% 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%

Ryzen 5 1500X 9
i5-13400F 27
+207%

Core i5-13400F outperforms Ryzen 5 1500X by 207% 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%

Ryzen 5 1500X 805
i5-13400F 2364
+194%

Core i5-13400F outperforms Ryzen 5 1500X by 194% 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%

Ryzen 5 1500X 154
i5-13400F 252
+63.6%

Core i5-13400F outperforms Ryzen 5 1500X by 64% 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%

Ryzen 5 1500X 1.73
i5-13400F 3.06
+76.9%

Core i5-13400F outperforms Ryzen 5 1500X by 77% 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%

Ryzen 5 1500X 4.9
i5-13400F 12.2
+149%

Core i5-13400F outperforms Ryzen 5 1500X by 149% 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%

Ryzen 5 1500X 3910
i5-13400F 8602
+120%

Core i5-13400F outperforms Ryzen 5 1500X by 120% 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%

Ryzen 5 1500X 50
i5-13400F 137
+176%

Core i5-13400F outperforms Ryzen 5 1500X by 176% 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%

Ryzen 5 1500X 177
i5-13400F 315
+77.7%

Core i5-13400F outperforms Ryzen 5 1500X by 78% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.88 16.30
Recency 11 April 2017 4 January 2023
Physical cores 4 10
Threads 8 16
Cost $189 $196

The Core i5-13400F is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 5 1500X in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 5 1500X and Core i5-13400F, 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.


AMD Ryzen 5 1500X
Ryzen 5 1500X
Intel Core i5-13400F
Core i5-13400F

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.


4.2 868 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 1500X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 2562 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 5 1500X or Core i5-13400F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.