CPU Comparison

The Intel Core i5-13400E is the dominant performer in this comparison, winning every single benchmark by a massive margin, but the Intel Atom x7405C wins in efficiency and platform economics. The data shows a complete mismatch in raw compute capability: the i5-13400E delivers scores that are over 400% higher across all Cinebench tests, while the Atom x7405C operates at a fraction of the power draw. The i5-13400E is a desktop-focused processor aimed at sustained multi-threaded workloads, whereas the Atom x7405C is a low-power mobile part designed for embedded and power-constrained environments. The choice between them is not about performance, it is about whether the workload requires the i5-13400E’s massive compute headroom or the Atom x7405C’s minimal power footprint.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-13400E wins every performance category in the benchmark suite. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 22,950 versus the Atom x7405C’s 4,435, a 417.5% advantage. The single-core gap is equally stark: 3,240 versus 626 in Cinebench R23, a 417.6% lead. Across all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, the i5-13400E wins with deltas ranging from 417.5% to 425.8%. This processor is built for heavy lifting, rendering, compilation, and any workload that scales with cores and threads. Its 10 cores and 16 threads, paired with a 4.60 GHz boost clock and 20 MB of shared L3 cache, provide the resources needed for demanding desktop applications.

The Intel Atom x7405C wins the efficiency argument, though no benchmark data measures power directly. Its 12 W TDP is drastically lower than the i5-13400E’s 65 W, and its 4 cores and 4 threads are sufficient for lightweight, always-on tasks. The Atom also holds a unique advantage in its PassMark scores, which are not available for the i5-13400E. These scores, such as 56,317 in data compression and 14,669 in integer math, indicate that the Atom is not a slouch in specific niche operations, but they cannot be compared directly. The Atom’s real win is in its BGA 1264 socket and mobile market segment, which allows for compact, low-power designs where the i5-13400E’s Socket 1700 desktop platform would be impractical. The Atom x7405C is the choice for fanless or battery-powered systems, while the i5-13400E is the choice for performance-critical desktop builds.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from entirely different architectural lineages. The i5-13400E is based on Raptor Lake, specifically the Raptor Lake-S die, manufactured on Intel’s 10 nm process with a die size of 215 mm². It features a hybrid design with 10 cores and 16 threads, using a combination of performance and efficiency cores, though the benchmark database does not specify the exact core mix. Its cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and a substantial 20 MB of shared L3 cache. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration, has ECC memory support, and provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. Integrated graphics are present in the form of UHD Graphics 730.

The Atom x7405C is built on Amston Lake, with the codename Amston Lake, and belongs to the Atom (Gracemont) generation. It is also on a 10 nm process, but it uses a simpler design with 4 cores and 4 threads, no hyper-threading. Its cache layout is different: 96 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of shared L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The Atom supports DDR4 and DDR5 but only in single-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. It lacks ECC memory support and has no integrated graphics. Its PCIe implementation is older, using Gen 3 with 9 lanes. The Atom is a mobile part on a BGA 1264 socket, while the i5-13400E is a desktop part on Socket 1700. The i5-13400E was released in January 2023; the Atom x7405C came later in April 2024.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Every Cinebench result shows a four-to-five-fold performance gap in favor of the i5-13400E. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i5-13400E scores 2,313 against the Atom’s 446, a 418.6% delta. The single-core R15 test shows 326 versus 62, a 425.8% delta, the largest relative difference in the entire suite. In Cinebench R20, the multi-core scores are 9,639 versus 1,862 (417.7% delta), and single-core is 1,360 versus 262 (419.1% delta). The R23 results follow the same pattern: 22,950 versus 4,435 in multi-core (417.5% delta) and 3,240 versus 626 in single-core (417.6% delta). These numbers indicate that the i5-13400E is not merely faster, it is in a different performance class entirely. The consistent delta across all tests suggests the performance advantage is systemic, stemming from core count, thread count, and clock speed, rather than workload-specific optimizations.

The Atom x7405C has no head-to-head wins, but its PassMark results provide context for its capabilities in isolation. Its single-thread PassMark score is 1,675, and its multi-thread score is 5,218. It scores 9,063 in floating-point math and 14,669 in integer math. These are respectable numbers for a 12 W part, but they are not comparable to the i5-13400E because the i5-13400E lacks PassMark data in the benchmark database. The Atom’s 4,004 score in data encryption and 27,71 in extended instructions suggest it can handle basic security and cryptographic workloads, but the i5-13400E’s Cinebench dominance implies it would outperform in any CPU-intensive task where both have results.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i5-13400E has 10 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Atom x7405C has 4 cores and 4 threads.

Q: How much faster is the i5-13400E in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The i5-13400E scores 22,950 versus the Atom’s 4,435, giving the i5-13400E a 417.5% advantage.

Q: Does the Atom x7405C support ECC memory?

A: No, the Atom x7405C does not support ECC memory, while the i5-13400E does.

Q: What is the memory channel configuration for each processor?

A: The i5-13400E supports dual-channel memory, while the Atom x7405C supports single-channel memory.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The i5-13400E includes UHD Graphics 730, while the Atom x7405C has no integrated graphics.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The i5-13400E has a TDP of 65 W, and the Atom x7405C has a TDP of 12 W.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-13400E | Intel Atom x7405C |

|---------------|----------------------|-------------------|

| Cores | 10 | 4 |

| Threads | 16 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 2.40 GHz | 1.70 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.60 GHz | 3.40 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 12 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 1264 |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake | Amston Lake |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-S | Amston Lake |

| Generation | Core i5 (Raptor Lake) | Atom (Gracemont) |

| Die Size | 215 mm² | N/A |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 96 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 2 MB (shared) |

| L3 Cache | 20 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Single-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | N/A | 38.4 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 3, 9 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | N/A |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2023-01-03 | 2024-04-07 |

| Launch MSRP | N/A | $57 |

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i5-13400E is the only choice for anyone who needs raw computational performance. It wins all six head-to-head benchmarks with deltas exceeding 400%, and its 10 cores, 16 threads, and 4.60 GHz boost clock provide the resources for demanding multi-threaded workloads like video rendering, software compilation, and scientific computing. Its dual-channel memory support, ECC capability, and PCIe Gen 5 connectivity make it a robust desktop platform component. The i5-13400E’s 65 W TDP is higher, but that is the cost of its performance class.

The Intel Atom x7405C is the right pick for power-sensitive, space-constrained applications where performance is secondary. Its 12 W TDP allows for passive cooling and battery operation, and its BGA 1264 socket enables compact embedded designs. The Atom’s single-channel memory and lack of ECC and integrated graphics are acceptable trade-offs for its intended mobile market segment. Its PassMark scores, particularly 56,317 in data compression and 14,669 in integer math, suggest it handles specific workloads competently, but these are not comparable to the i5-13400E’s Cinebench results. For a desktop user, the i5-13400E is the clear winner. For an embedded or low-power designer, the Atom x7405C is the only viable option. The benchmark data does not show a single scenario where the Atom outperforms the i5-13400E, but the power and platform differences make the Atom a legitimate choice for its niche.