Intel Core i5-13400F

[R0H1T]

Well you can't ever accuse the guy of not being a fan, he probably has an altar of Intel right besides his bed

 

[W1zzard]

left the R9 7950X3D out

The comparison charts have a cutoff range, to keep the chart at sane lengths. It's roughly +-25% application performance, plus a handful of important SKUs that still need to be included

The 7950X3D costs 3.5x (!) as much as the 13400F

 

[Imouto]

The comparison charts have a cutoff range, to keep the chart at sane lengths. It's roughly +-25% application performance, plus a handful of important SKUs that still need to be included

The 7950X3D costs 3.5x (!) as much as the 13400F

How is the i5 13400F included in the R9 7950X3D review and charts then?

 

[W1zzard]

How is the i5 13400F included in the R9 7950X review and charts then?

I failed at unclicking it

 

[Dawidci]

Power consumption for Ryzen 7600(X) looks strange. Higher than 7700(X) and much higher than in first tests for 7600 (47W Stock - https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-5-7600-non-x/22.html). Is it correct? And if yes why it was so much lower earlier? @W1zzard

 

[tussinman]

https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...600kf-processor-20m-cache-up-to-4-90-ghz.html
Up to DDR5 4800 MT/s
Up to DDR4 3200 MT/s

https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...3400f-processor-20m-cache-up-to-4-60-ghz.html
Up to DDR5 4800 MT/s
Up to DDR4 3200 MT/s

That's just the official supported speeds. Basically they'll guarantee you can get that high but that's it everything else is up to the chip and motherboard

The non-k chips especially on ddr4 are intentionally gimped, it was a controversial aspect of alder/raptor. Most people for example who bought the 12400/12500 where mad that they couldn't get 3600 stable (had to stick with 3200) yet those with a 12600k where running 4000mhz with zero issues.

 

[JustBenching]

Because @W1zzard left the R9 7950X3D out. As per its own review:

See the i5 13400F included? And you accuse other people of fanboyism when it makes yourself blind.

Of course the 3d is more efficient than the 13400f. That's a 200 euro cpu, lol. The 13900f which is comparable to the 3d roflstomps it in efficiency

Well you can't ever accuse the guy of not being a fan, he probably has an altar of Intel right besides his bed

It's topping the st chart as well. Thanks for mentioning it

 

[W1zzard]

Power consumption for Ryzen 7600(X) looks strange. Higher than 7700(X) and much higher than in first tests for 7600 (47W Stock - https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-ryzen-5-7600-non-x/22.html). Is it correct? And if yes why it was so much lower earlier? @W1zzard

View attachment 286800

https://imgur.com/pFBgkrt

You are right .. but wtf .. looks like it never really went to idle .. seems all my 7600 & 7600X data is invalid.. will retest asap. The 7600X is here, AMD has borrowed the 7600 non-X until next week

 

[Imouto]

I failed at unclicking it

I don't see how the most efficient and fastest gaming CPU in the market is less relevant for these charts than, for example, the i9 10900K.

Of course the 3d is more efficient than the 13400f. That's a 200 euro cpu, lol. The 13900f which is comparable to the 3d roflstomps it in efficiency

When you say something like this you should back it up with some proof.

It's topping the st chart as well. Thanks for mentioning it

You can't make this up.

 

[JustBenching]

When you say something like this you should back it up with some proof.

Isn't it self evident that a 13900 at 65w is more efficient than a 13400 at 65w? Whatever man

 

[W1zzard]

I don't see how the most efficient and fastest gaming CPU in the market is less relevant for these charts than, for example, the i9 10900K.

It breaks the relative scale of the chart, because it's too fast

https://imgur.com/RjOBNZh

 

[nomdeplume]

What are the perceptions of impact lacking igpu has on 13th gen processor? Perceptions of price removed, of course.

 

[Imouto]

It breaks the relative scale of the chart, because it's too fast

There are plenty of other charts in the review where exactly that happens. There are plenty of too fast or too slow entries in them.

 

[Lew Zealand]

It doesn't? It literally topped the mt efficiency chart, lol.

Intel cpus are the efficiency kings

Only when restricted to 65W, which only occurs with a few low-tier Motherboards, and even then only barely, with 3 other CPUs clustered closely.

Loads of special circumstances to eke out a very slim lead in a single category.

It appears you confused what the OS handles with how the processor is designed to work. Key word being work. This was actually what impressed me the most out of the box with 8400 coming from 2400. Sure on paper it was close to being twice the processor. Just how advanced it was at avoiding getting bogged down, how eager to work, was surprising. Even against the last two gen of 4 core i5.

This is an interesting observation and unfortunately one I couldn't appreciate at the time. The 8400 was my first non-NUC PC since a Northwood P4 a long time before and it just seemed to work effortlessly.

But retrospectively comparing that 8400 to some Haswell 4590, 4690, and 4790 (no -K SKUs), that not-getting-bogged down is quite evident in the 8400. And it's really evident compared to a Core i5-8259u in a NUC I have running at 35W. Same Coffee Lake arch, 16GB DDR 2400 CL17 (vs 2666 CL13 on the 8400), but the 8259u just seems held back a bit. I'm sure the laptop mobo components aren't helping though the SSDs are the same. But even at 3.6 GHz NUC vs 3.8 GHz desktop, the difference in 'feel' is evident.

And when I go to my R5-5600, it's even more sprightly than the 8400. I assume this 13400F would be that much more so. All of this is overkill for everyday use but it's still interesting to see how even those slight delays in processing can still feel so evident.

 

[nomdeplume]

This is an interesting observation and unfortunately one I couldn't appreciate at the time. The 8400 was my first non-NUC PC since a Northwood P4 a long time before and it just seemed to work effortlessly.

It really was a pleasant change that for a short time allowed me to see it at greater relief than is typical during everyday use. The extent to which background behaviors changed when a program still took about the same time to open was enthralling.

Signs are looking good 13400 improves upon what I felt was the one low point. Irrespective of load type, 100% cpu usage (realistically just consistent high use) governed from relinquishing actual computing power of 100% cpu usage at highest frequencies for some minutes.

And when I go to my R5-5600, it's even more sprightly than the 8400. I assume this 13400F would be that much more so. All of this is overkill for everyday use but it's still interesting to see how even those slight delays in processing can still feel so evident.

GerKNG noting that outside of benchmarks his 13400 with DDR4 is comparable to his 13700K with DDR5 had me seriously thinking by the time I came across your post. 13400 might be overkill for everyday use an 8400 is probably already way more than is needed for. Improvements for gaming or other more intensive programs certainly look notable.

Internal debate over a very open plan for new build or making changes to present one more aligned with gaming (Prime/CSM+DDR4 2400 ) is dead. I was seriously considering buying a Maximus XI Gene. Too bad there aren't even any passably good mATX Z790 mobos widely available. Not a great point in time to be taking chances on dodgy unbranded boards direct from Asia debatably capable of filling that gap. (Unlike hot market for board soldered chips that seem to be an interest of yours)

 

[W1zzard]

GerKNG noting that outside of benchmarks his 13400 with DDR4 is comparable to his 13700K with DDR5 had me seriously thinking by the time I came across your post

I switched from 8700K to 5800X and haven't noticed any difference in interactive workloads (which is pretty much everything that I do all day).

 

[tvshacker]

The comparisons between the 13400F and the 12600K seem quite similar to 5800X vs 5700X. Basically the same chip (very similar performance in most cases), released ~1 year later and with great improvement in power draw.

 

[sLowEnd]

Arctic 17 CO for $15 is better than the stock cooler and more than enough.

Great, so a $10+$15=$25 price gap.

 

[JustBenching]

Only when restricted to 65W, which only occurs with a few low-tier Motherboards, and even then only barely, with 3 other CPUs clustered closely.

Loads of special circumstances to eke out a very slim lead in a single category.

It tops the charts in both mt, st and gaming efficiency. Sure it ties or gets beaten by 1 or 2 skus in one of these categories but no cpu up there is as efficient as this one in every single category.

So.. What do you mean a slim lead in a single category? Not only is it FASTER in mt than it's competitors, it's also being faster while being more efficient. And cheaper. And can use ddr4

 

[Lew Zealand]

It tops the charts in both mt, st and gaming efficiency. Sure it ties or gets beaten by 1 or 2 skus in one of these categories but no cpu up there is as efficient as this one in every single category.

So.. What do you mean a slim lead in a single category? Not only is it FASTER in mt than it's competitors, it's also being faster while being more efficient. And cheaper. And can use ddr4

• Does not top the Single Thread Efficiency, being 41% behind the leader. Why even mention this?
• In the vast majority of Mobos it's 22% less efficient in Multi Thread Efficiency.
• Can top the Multi Thread Efficiency, but only in a few lower end Mobos by all of 1.2%, with 3 other CPUs being within 3.3% of it.
• In games it does very well but is surrounded by similarly priced competitors

With DDR4 it may very well lose it's one efficiency win as performance drops, but you're guessing. Show me data, not claims.

It's a pretty good all-arounder, but don't oversell it with misleading claims. It's good value for the money and is power efficient but, from Wizzard's post just above:

"You are right .. but wtf .. looks like it never really went to idle .. seems all my 7600 & 7600X data is invalid.. will retest asap."

The real efficiency numbers for the 7600 and 7600X are not in the charts. It will be interesting to see how those change the comparisons.

 

[Pepamami]

woah! I tought all 13rd gen gonna be terrible with all those crazy powerdraws and temperatures. I might even consider buying this one.

 

[Garrus]

The "too many cores" statement isn't true, or we would see much better performance/power with the power limit removed. Higher clocks and thus higher voltage would have been good though, and with such an increase the more power that you mentioned would be useful, too.

Quite right, that's what I meant. Smart, you basically understood me despite my comment not being clear. I mean the 13400 needs more frequency to compete. At that core count and with those power limits it is not a strong competitor as it would be frequency limited by the power limit. I meant it should have higher clock speeds to go along with a higher power limit. As you said. It's competitor is a 5.55Ghz 7600. Ouch.

Great, so a $10+$15=$25 price gap.

And you are getting A LOT for that $25. Also I can at least hand it to Intel that their stock cooler despite being worse at cooling, has a quieter bearing or motor. The AMD Ryzen 7600 cooler makes a very annoying noise. Really wish AMD would fix that. Would be a great cooler if it was fixed for a buck.

--------

I did test my 7600X, and I received a score of 1910. It boosted very high with the stock BIOS (early release). I tested my 7600 today with the latest BIOS, and it boosts a lot less at stock (500mhz slower?). 1847 in Cinebench C23. Gigabyte B650M DS3H.

-------

Anyways, for anyone looking for advice, get the 7600, clock it up from the stock all core of ~4.8Ghz to 5.50Ghz all core. Run it with 5600C28 memory (the cheapest high performance stuff here, $140 for 32GB) and "Bob's your Uncle" (et voilà! for you non commonwealth people). Would make a really great article. Ryzen 7600, 5.50Ghz, DDR5 5600C28. Absolutely crush the 13400. In Canada the two CPUs are the same price. Ryzen 7600 is technically cheaper if you buy a bundle.

I just bought the Ryzen 7600 + 32GB DDR5 5600C36 (C28 stuff sold out before I got there, it just had a massive price drop and sold like crazy) + Gigabyte B650M DS3H with Jedi: Survivor for $435 USD. Amazing value right now. Saved me $70 after tax for the game alone. The 7800X3D not having Jedi: Survivor was a deal breaker.

 

[antuk15]

For someone like me that has a motherboard with external clock gen it's better for get a 12600 or 12700 and BCLK overclock.

It's a shame Intel stopped BCLK overclocking on 13th gen as I was really looking forward to 5.5Ghz+ overclocks.

 

[THU31]

The biggest advantage of the 12400 was the price. The 13400 is over 30% more expensive for a 100 MHz boost, offering basically identical gaming performance.

The 12600K is just a little bit more expensive, but you can easily clock it at 4.8-5.0 Ghz, and more importantly you can fully tune it to your preferences.

Unfortunately the 13400 will find its way into many pre-builts and recommendations.

 

[Chrispy_]

Zen4 isn't the competition for this, is it?

I feel it's priced directly against the 5700X and AM4 (being an unlocked chip you can just change PBO to match a 5800X in about 10 seconds). Even the gimped Gen5 support makes it more of an AM4 competitor, too.

Yes, the 13400F has ~3-5% more performance than even a pseudo-5800X but it's also 5% more expensive, the motherboards start at $40 more than B550 boards, and it needs Windows 11's scheduler, which is a problem for the many people who dislike 11 over 10 (I know there are fans of W11 here at TPU but the general consensus from the 500+ staff I manage at work is "eewwwwwwwwwwwww yuck yuck yuck why did Microsoft break the UI just to appease tablet users all over again?!!!")

https://imgur.com/pFBgkrt

You are right .. but wtf .. looks like it never really went to idle .. seems all my 7600 & 7600X data is invalid.. will retest asap. The 7600X is here, AMD has borrowed the 7600 non-X until next week

Oh no! What a PITA :\