Intel Core i5-13400F vs Intel Core i7-13620H Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-13400F has an average benchmark score of 25292, while the Intel Core i7-13620H scores 24911. The i5-13400F sits slightly ahead, with its nearest rival (AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS) at 25284, a delta of 0%.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap in Cinebench R23?

A: The i5-13400F leads by 48.9% in Cinebench R23 multicore, scoring 22604 versus the i7-13620H’s 15176. This is the largest multi-core delta in the head-to-head data.

Q: Does the mobile chip win any single-threaded tests?

A: Yes, the i7-13620H wins 3DMark single-thread (1008 vs 960, a 4.8% advantage) and 3DMark 2-thread (1963 vs 1880, 4.2%). However, the i5-13400F takes Cinebench R15 singlecore (321 vs 263, 22.1%) and Cinebench R23 singlecore (3191 vs 1833, 74.1%).

Q: What is the difference in TDP between the two?

A: The i5-13400F has a TDP of 65 watts, while the i7-13620H has a TDP of 45 watts. The desktop part draws more power but also delivers higher sustained multi-core scores.

Q: Which processor has the larger L3 cache?

A: The i7-13620H has 24 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i5-13400F has 20 MB. The mobile part also has larger L2 cache: 2 MB per core versus 1.25 MB per core.

Q: How many benchmark wins does each processor claim in the head-to-head comparison?

A: The i5-13400F wins 16 of the 23 recorded tests, while the i7-13620H wins 7. The desktop chip dominates in multi-threaded and most single-thread workloads, but the mobile chip wins in several 3DMark thread-count tests and specific PassMark tasks.

Architecture Differences

Both processors belong to Intel’s Core 13th Gen family and share the Raptor Lake architecture, but they target different market segments. The i5-13400F is a desktop part (Raptor Lake-S) on Intel Socket 1700, while the i7-13620H is a mobile part (Raptor Lake-H) on Intel BGA 1744. Both use Intel’s 10 nm process node and are manufactured by Intel.

Core configuration is identical: 10 cores and 16 threads for both. The L1 cache is the same at 80 KB per core. The differences appear in the cache hierarchy: the i5-13400F has 1.25 MB L2 per core and 20 MB shared L3, whereas the i7-13620H has 2 MB L2 per core and 24 MB shared L3. The mobile chip therefore holds a cache capacity advantage, which may help in certain latency-sensitive workloads.

Clock speeds differ notably. The i5-13400F has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The i7-13620H has a lower base clock at 2.40 GHz but a higher boost clock at 4.90 GHz. This higher boost ceiling likely contributes to the mobile chip’s wins in short, lightly threaded 3DMark tests.

Memory support is identical (DDR4 and DDR5, dual-channel), and both lack ECC support. PCIe lanes differ: the i5-13400F provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the i7-13620H provides Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only). The desktop chip offers double the CPU-attached PCIe lanes.

Integrated graphics are another differentiator: the i5-13400F has no integrated graphics (the “F” suffix), while the i7-13620H includes UHD Graphics 770. This matters for systems without a discrete GPU, since the mobile chip can output video on its own.

Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. Both are listed as active production parts with the same release date of 2023-01-03. The i5-13400F has a launch MSRP of $196; the i7-13620H has a launch MSRP of $502.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a clear pattern: the i5-13400F dominates in sustained multi-threaded workloads, while the i7-13620H sometimes edges ahead in short-duration tests with few threads.

The biggest win for the i5-13400F is in Cinebench R23 singlecore, where it scores 3191 against 1833, a 74.1% advantage. Cinebench R23 multicore follows with a 48.9% lead (22604 vs 15176). These are substantial margins, not marginal differences. The desktop chip also leads Cinebench R20 multicore by 7.1% (8892 vs 8305) and Cinebench R20 singlecore by 7.1% (1255 vs 1172). Cinebench R15 singlecore shows a 22.1% win for the i5-13400F (321 vs 263), while R15 multicore is essentially a tie: the i7-13620H wins by 0.1% (2281 vs 2278).

In 3DMark tests, the results are mixed. The i5-13400F wins 16-thread (7314 vs 7056, 3.7%), 8-thread (5591 vs 5443, 2.7%), and max-thread (7307 vs 7178, 1.8%) tests. The i7-13620H wins single-thread (1008 vs 960, 4.8%), 2-thread (1963 vs 1880, 4.2%), and 4-thread (3621 vs 3459, 4.5%) tests. The mobile chip’s higher boost clock appears to give it an edge when only a few cores are active.

PassMark results are mostly in favor of the i5-13400F. It wins data compression by 10.7% (311364 vs 281335), extended instructions by 13.3% (19847 vs 17513), random string sorting by 9.1% (32076 vs 29395), data encryption by 6.7% (16608 vs 15568), multithread by 3.5% (25032 vs 24192), floating point math by 1.3% (60539 vs 59762), and single-thread by 1.3% (3634 vs 3589). The i7-13620H takes find prime numbers by 16.2% (99 vs 83), integer math by 1.2% (80948 vs 79942), and physics by 14% (1671 vs 1437).

The overall benchmark score difference is modest: the i5-13400F averages 25292, while the i7-13620H averages 24911, a gap of roughly 1.5%. The i5-13400F’s nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS (delta 0%) and Intel Core 5 120 (delta -0.3%). The i7-13620H’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-11850H (delta -0.1%) and AMD Ryzen 5 7500F (delta -0.2%). Both processors sit at the 77th percentile among all CPUs.

Specification Differences

• Socket: Intel Socket 1700 (i5-13400F) vs Intel BGA 1744 (i7-13620H)
• Base clock: 2.50 GHz (i5-13400F) vs 2.40 GHz (i7-13620H)
• Boost clock: 4.60 GHz (i5-13400F) vs 4.90 GHz (i7-13620H)
• TDP: 65 W (i5-13400F) vs 45 W (i7-13620H)
• L2 cache: 1.25 MB per core (i5-13400F) vs 2 MB per core (i7-13620H)
• L3 cache: 20 MB shared (i5-13400F) vs 24 MB shared (i7-13620H)
• PCIe lanes: Gen 5, 16 lanes CPU only (i5-13400F) vs Gen 5, 8 lanes CPU only (i7-13620H)
• Integrated graphics: None (i5-13400F) vs UHD Graphics 770 (i7-13620H)
• Market segment: Desktop (i5-13400F) vs Mobile (i7-13620H)
• Part number: SRMBGSRMBN (i5-13400F) vs SRMJ0 (i7-13620H)
• Die size: 215 mm² (i5-13400F) vs not recorded (i7-13620H)
• Launch MSRP: $196 (i5-13400F) vs $502 (i7-13620H)

Identical specifications include core count (10), thread count (16), process node (10 nm), L1 cache (80 KB per core), memory support (DDR4, DDR5), memory bus (dual-channel), ECC support (false), and unlocked multiplier (false). Both are manufactured by Intel and share the Raptor Lake architecture.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: for raw performance in most measured workloads, the Intel Core i5-13400F is the stronger processor. It wins 16 of 23 head-to-head tests, including every Cinebench R23 test with a massive 48.9% multicore and 74.1% singlecore margin. Its average benchmark score of 25292 exceeds the i7-13620H’s 24911 by about 1.5%, and it matches or beats all of its nearest rivals within 0.4%.

The i7-13620H is not without merits. It wins 7 tests, including all three short-thread 3DMark tests (single, 2-thread, 4-thread) and PassMark physics, integer math, and prime numbers. Its higher boost clock (4.90 GHz) and larger caches (2 MB L2 per core, 24 MB L3) likely explain these wins. For a mobile processor with a 45 W TDP, it delivers respectable single-thread performance and even matches the i5-13400F in Cinebench R15 multicore within 0.1%.

However, the i5-13400F’s advantages are decisive in most scenarios. It outperforms the i7-13620H in every Cinebench multicore test except R15, where the margin is negligible. It also wins all PassMark tests except three. The desktop chip’s higher TDP (65 W vs 45 W) enables sustained multi-threaded performance that the mobile chip cannot match, particularly in Cinebench R23 where the gap exceeds 48%.

For a desktop build with a dedicated GPU, the i5-13400F is the clear choice based on benchmark data. It offers superior multi-threaded throughput, faster single-thread performance in most tests, and double the CPU-attached PCIe lanes. The i7-13620H makes more sense for a laptop or compact mobile system where the 45 W TDP and integrated graphics matter, and where the higher boost clock can win short, lightly threaded tasks. But for pure compute performance, the i5-13400F wins the majority of recorded benchmarks.

Where Each One Wins

Intel Core i5-13400F wins in: sustained multi-threaded workloads. Cinebench R23 multicore shows a 48.9% lead, and Cinebench R20 multicore is 7.1% ahead. PassMark multithread (3.5% lead), data compression (10.7%), data encryption (6.7%), extended instructions (13.3%), random string sorting (9.1%), and floating point math (1.3%) all favor the desktop chip. It also wins most single-thread tests: Cinebench R15 singlecore (22.1%), R20 singlecore (7.1%), R23 singlecore (74.1%), and PassMark single-thread (1.3%). 3DMark 8-thread, 16-thread, and max-thread tests also go to the i5-13400F.

Intel Core i7-13620H wins in: short, lightly threaded bursts and specific compute tasks. 3DMark single-thread (4.8% lead), 2-thread (4.2%), and 4-thread (4.5%) tests favor the mobile chip, likely due to its 4.90 GHz boost clock. PassMark physics (14% lead), find prime numbers (16.2%), and integer math (1.2%) also go to the i7-13620H. Cinebench R15 multicore is a near tie, with the mobile chip ahead by just 0.1%.

The pattern is clear: if a workload can use many threads for a long duration, the i5-13400F wins decisively. If a workload is short, uses 1-4 threads, and benefits from a high boost clock, the i7-13620H can win. The i5-13400F is the better all-round performer, while the i7-13620H excels in niche, latency-sensitive tasks.