Intel Core i9-13900KF vs Intel Core i9-13900KS Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a complete sweep for the Intel Core i9-13900KS across all 25 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with zero wins for the Intel Core i9-13900KF. The margins vary widely, from a narrow 2% edge in PassMark integer math to a dominant 16.4% advantage in PassMark physics.

The largest single gap appears in PassMark physics, where the 13900KS scores 3441 against 2956 for the 13900KF. That 16.4% delta is the standout outlier in the comparison, suggesting the KS part has a significant edge in workloads that stress physical simulation. PassMark find prime numbers also shows a substantial 14.2% delta, with the KS scoring 257 versus 225 for the KF. These two tests reveal that the KS advantage is not uniform; it grows in specific compute patterns.

Cinebench results cluster tightly around a 5% lead. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the KS scores 51368 against 48855 for the KF, a 5.1% delta. The single-core R23 result mirrors that exactly: 7252 versus 6897, also 5.1%. Cinebench R20 multi-core and single-core both show 5.1% deltas as well, with scores of 21574 versus 20519 and 3045 versus 2896 respectively. Cinebench R15 follows the same pattern, with a 5.1% multi-core delta (5177 versus 4924) and a 5% single-core delta (730 versus 695).

Geekbench tells a slightly different story. The multi-core result shows a 5% delta (23607 versus 22486), but single-core narrows to 3.9% (2771 versus 2668). This suggests the KS gains more from its higher boost clock in multi-threaded scenarios than in single-threaded ones, though it wins both.

3DMark results range from 2.4% to 5.4%. The max threads test shows the biggest delta at 5.4% (16243 versus 15405). The 16-thread test shows 3.9% (11616 versus 11177), 8-thread shows 3.5% (8812 versus 8510), single-thread shows 3.2% (1226 versus 1188), 2-thread shows 2.5% (2412 versus 2353), and 4-thread shows 2.4% (4754 versus 4643). The pattern here is not monotonic; the KS advantage peaks at max thread count but dips at 4 threads.

PassMark suite results are generally smaller, with the notable exceptions of physics and prime numbers. Floating point math shows a 2.6% delta (154805 versus 150869), integer math shows 2% (211027 versus 206859), single-thread shows 2.8% (4712 versus 4584), data compression shows 3.6% (814838 versus 786218), data encryption shows 3.4% (47772 versus 46186), extended instructions shows 4.6% (48217 versus 46084), random string sorting shows 4.3% (90257 versus 86510), and multithread shows 5% (60644 versus 57729).

The average benchmark score difference is modest in percentage terms: the KS averages 64051 against the KF's 61841. That is roughly a 3.6% gap in the aggregate. Both processors sit at the 93rd percentile among all CPUs in the database, meaning they occupy the same performance tier overall, even though the KS wins every individual comparison.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same fundamental architecture. They are both Raptor Lake-S parts on the Intel 10 nm process, built by Intel, with a die size of 257 mm². Both have 24 cores and 32 threads, with identical cache hierarchies: 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. Both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, and both support ECC memory. Both use Intel Socket 1700 and offer PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. Both have an unlocked multiplier.

The core differences are clock speed, TDP, integrated graphics, and memory bandwidth. The 13900KS has a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 6.00 GHz. The 13900KF has a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz. The KS runs 200 MHz higher at base and boost, which explains much of its benchmark advantage.

The TDP figures differ: the KS is rated at 150 watts, while the KF is rated at 125 watts. This 25-watt gap reflects the higher clock speeds and likely a more aggressive power delivery profile for the KS part. The database does not record measured power consumption, so the real-world thermal impact is not quantified here, but the rated figures indicate the KS is designed to draw more power under load.

The integrated graphics situation is a clear differentiator. The 13900KS includes UHD Graphics 770, while the 13900KF has no integrated graphics at all. The KF suffix in Intel's naming convention traditionally indicates a chip without iGPU, and this pair fits that pattern. Buyers who need a display output without a discrete GPU must choose the KS. The KF requires a separate graphics card for any video output.

Memory bandwidth is listed for the KS at 89.6 GB/s, while the KF has no recorded bandwidth figure in the database. Both support the same memory types and channel configuration, so the practical difference is likely minimal, but the KS carries a published specification in this area.

Release timing also differs. The 13900KS launched on 2023-01-11, while the 13900KF launched earlier on 2022-09-26. The KS arrived as a later, higher-clocked variant of the same silicon. The part numbers confirm distinct SKUs: SRMBX for the KS, SRMBJ for the KF.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core i9-13900KS wins every multi-core benchmark in the database. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 51368 versus 48855, a 5.1% delta. Geekbench multi-core shows 23607 versus 22486, a 5% delta. PassMark multithread shows 60644 versus 57729, also a 5% delta.

Q: Is the single-core performance gap the same as the multi-core gap?

A: No. The single-core deltas are generally smaller. Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 5.1% delta, but Geekbench single-core drops to 3.9% (2771 versus 2668), and PassMark single-thread drops further to 2.8% (4712 versus 4584). The KS gains more from its higher boost clock in multi-threaded tests.

Q: Does the 13900KF have integrated graphics?

A: No. The database lists no integrated graphics for the 13900KF. The 13900KS includes UHD Graphics 770. The KF part requires a discrete GPU for display output.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The 13900KS has a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 6.00 GHz. The 13900KF has a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz. The KS is 200 MHz higher in both metrics.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes. Both the 13900KS and the 13900KF list ECC memory support as true in the database. Both also support DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus.

Q: How do these CPUs compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: The 13900KS has an average benchmark score of 64051, placing it 0.2% behind the AMD EPYC 7343 (64202), 0.4% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 (63765), 0.6% behind the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F (64438), and 0.9% behind the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 (64640). The 13900KF averages 61841, essentially tied with the Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus (61834), 0.1% behind the Intel Core i9-13900K (61766), 0.2% behind the Intel Core i9-13900T (61723), and 0.8% ahead of the Intel Xeon 636 (61360).

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture. The Intel Core i9-13900KS wins every single benchmark comparison against the 13900KF, with deltas ranging from 2% to 16.4%. For users who want the absolute maximum performance from the Raptor Lake-S platform, the KS is the superior choice on every measured metric.

The largest advantages appear in PassMark physics (16.4%) and PassMark find prime numbers (14.2%). These are not marginal wins; they represent substantial gains in specific compute patterns. Anyone running physics simulations or prime-number-heavy workloads should strongly favor the KS based on this data.

The 13900KF remains a strong performer in absolute terms. Its average benchmark score of 61841 places it at the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, and it sits essentially tied with the Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus and 0.1% behind the Intel Core i9-13900K. The KF is not a slow processor; it is simply outclassed by its KS sibling in every recorded test.

The integrated graphics difference matters for certain buyers. The KS includes UHD Graphics 770, while the KF has none. Systems built with the KF must include a discrete GPU from the start. The KS can serve as a stopgap for basic display output, though no gaming performance is recorded for the iGPU in this database.

The clock speed gap of 200 MHz at both base and boost explains the consistent KS advantage. The higher 150-watt TDP rating versus 125 watts for the KF suggests the KS is designed to sustain those clocks under load, though the database does not record actual power consumption.

For the buyer who prioritizes every available point of performance, the 13900KS is the clear pick. For the buyer who can tolerate slightly lower scores, the 13900KF still delivers 93rd percentile performance and a lower launch MSRP. The choice is between maximum output and a more modest outlay, and the benchmark data offers no scenario where the KF outperforms the KS.

Specification Differences

The two processors share many specifications, but several fields differ in the database. The base clock is 3.20 GHz for the KS versus 3.00 GHz for the KF. The boost clock is 6.00 GHz for the KS versus 5.80 GHz for the KF. The TDP is 150 watts for the KS versus 125 watts for the KF.

Integrated graphics is present on the KS as UHD Graphics 770, while the KF has none. Memory bandwidth is listed as 89.6 GB/s for the KS, with no figure recorded for the KF. The launch MSRP is $699 for the KS and $564 for the KF. The release date is 2023-01-11 for the KS and 2022-09-26 for the KF. The part numbers are SRMBX for the KS and SRMBJ for the KF.

All other recorded specifications are identical: 24 cores, 32 threads, Raptor Lake architecture, 10 nm process, 257 mm² die size, 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, 36 MB shared L3, DDR4 and DDR5 memory support, dual-channel memory bus, ECC memory support, PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes, Intel Socket 1700, unlocked multiplier, and active production status.