SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i5-13400F + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER

Get a comprehensive performance analysis of your gaming rig with detailed benchmarks, bottleneck detection, and upgrade recommendations

83 / 100
HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 17% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio
Well Balanced
CPU
87%
VS
GPU
79%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core i5-13400F

25,292 Benchmark Score
Top 13% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER

2,690 Benchmark Score
Top 21% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →

Market Position

How your build compares to others
Budget
0-30
Mid-Range
30-60
High-End
60-85
Enthusiast
85-100
Your Build

Game Performance Benchmarks

Real-world 4K FPS in popular titles
View All Games →

Performance Insights

Tips to maximize your system

Strong Performance

Excellent for 1440p gaming. Most games will run at high/ultra settings smoothly.

Compatible Games See what you can play Compare CPUs Find upgrades Compare GPUs Find upgrades

Performance Tiers Explained

90-100

Ultimate

4K Ultra gaming, VR ready, ray tracing enabled, professional workloads

4K 60+ FPS VR Ready
70-89

High-End

1440p Ultra or 4K High settings, excellent for modern AAA titles

1440p Ultra 4K High
50-69

Mid-Range

1080p Ultra or 1440p Medium, great value for most gamers

1080p Ultra 1440p Med
30-49

Entry Level

1080p Medium settings, suitable for eSports and older titles

1080p Med eSports
0-29

Legacy

Basic gaming, older titles, consider upgrading for modern games

720p-1080p Low Older Games

# CPU Analysis

The Intel Core i5-13400F is a 13th-generation Raptor Lake desktop processor built on Intel's 10 nm process. It pairs 10 physical cores with 16 threads, a configuration that combines six performance cores with four efficiency cores to balance throughput against power draw. The base clock sits at 2.50 GHz with a boost ceiling of 4.60 GHz, and the chip carries a 65 W TDP. Cache is organized in three tiers: 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 20 MB L3 pool. Memory support spans both DDR4 and DDR5 through a dual-channel bus, and the CPU exposes PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the processor itself. The chip is socketed for Intel Socket 1700, and the multiplier is locked, meaning overclocking is not an available lever for extracting additional performance.

Benchmark results position this CPU at the 77th percentile among all processors tested, with an average benchmark score of 25,292. The 3DMark thread-scaling tests show a clear trajectory: 1,880 points with 2 threads, 3,459 with 4 threads, 5,591 with 8 threads, and 7,314 with 16 threads. The max-thread score of 7,307 is nearly identical to the 16-thread result, indicating that the processor is effectively saturated by 16 threads and that additional parallel work yields no meaningful gain. Single-thread performance in 3DMark is 960 points, which is roughly half the 2-thread score — a pattern consistent with a design where two threads can share a single core's resources efficiently.

Cinebench results reinforce the multi-core strength. The R23 multi-core score of 22,604 is substantially higher than the R20 result of 8,892, which in turn dwarfs the R15 multi-core figure of 2,278. These are different render workloads with different scaling characteristics, but the ratio between R23 and R20 (approximately 2.5x) is typical for a chip that scales well with additional cores. Single-core scores in Cinebench — 321 in R15, 1,255 in R20, and 3,191 in R23 — show that the performance cores are competitive for lightly threaded tasks, though not class-leading.

Geekbench scores of 11,068 multi-core and 1,996 single-core place the chip in a familiar mid-range desktop position. PassMark results add granularity: integer math at 79,942, floating-point math at 60,539, and extended instructions at 19,847. Data compression hits 311,364, while data encryption reaches 16,608. The multithread PassMark score of 25,032 is close to the average benchmark score of 25,292, confirming that the average across all tests is heavily influenced by parallel workloads. Single-thread PassMark is 3,634, and the physics score is 1,437. Prime number finding is notably low at 83, which suggests the efficiency cores may not accelerate this particular workload as effectively as the performance cores.

Relative to its nearest rivals, the i5-13400F sits in a tight cluster. The AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS matches it almost exactly with a 0% delta and an average score of 25,284. The Intel Core 5 120 is 0.3% behind at 25,362, and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D is also 0.3% behind at 25,365. The AMD Ryzen 7 6800H trails by 0.4% with a score of 25,201. These deltas are within noise for most workloads, meaning the i5-13400F is effectively performance-equivalent to a set of very different chips — some mobile, some desktop, some with 3D V-Cache. The practical interpretation is that the 13400F delivers a well-rounded blend of single-thread responsiveness and multi-thread throughput that lands it in the upper-middle tier of all CPUs.

FAQ

Q: How many cores and threads does the Intel Core i5-13400F have?

A: The processor has 10 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz.

Q: What memory types does the i5-13400F support?

A: It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory through a dual-channel bus, though the exact speed grades are not specified in the data.

Q: What is the CPU's performance percentile relative to all other processors?

A: The i5-13400F ranks at the 77th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 25,292.

Q: How does the i5-13400F compare to the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS?

A: The two are effectively tied. The Ryzen 9 6900HS has an average score of 25,284, which is a 0% delta from the i5-13400F's 25,292.

Q: Does the i5-13400F have integrated graphics?

A: No integrated graphics are listed in the data, and the "F" suffix in the model name typically indicates a chip without an iGPU, although the data pack does not explicitly confirm this.

Q: What is the TDP of the i5-13400F?

A: The thermal design power is 65 W, which is modest for a 10-core desktop processor.

Q: What socket does the i5-13400F use?

A: It uses Intel Socket 1700, and it is a desktop-market chip with a locked multiplier.

Benchmark Performance

The combined picture for this CPU+GPU pairing is defined by a large asymmetry. The CPU sits at the 77th percentile among all processors, while the GPU's benchmark score places it at only the 18th percentile among all GPUs. The combined percentile for the system is 48th. This means the processor is a top-quartile component, while the graphics card is in the bottom quintile of the GPU distribution.

The GPU's only benchmark result is a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,690. Its nearest rivals in the database are the NVIDIA Quadro K1100M at 2,664 (1% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 at 2,662 (1.1% behind), the Intel Arc Pro B50 at 2,660 (1.1% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 440 at 2,645 (1.7% behind). These are all low-end or legacy graphics solutions, and the RTX 5070 SUPER is within 2% of them. The 18th percentile ranking confirms that this GPU is not competitive with the broader field of graphics cards, despite its modern architecture and generous memory allocation.

The CPU, by contrast, outperforms its nearest rivals by small margins. The 3DMark multi-thread scores show strong scaling from 2 threads (1,880) to 16 threads (7,314), with the max-thread score of 7,307 nearly identical to the 16-thread figure. Cinebench R23 multi-core of 22,604 and Geekbench multi-core of 11,068 both indicate a capable parallel processor. The PassMark multithread score of 25,032 is nearly identical to the average benchmark score of 25,292, suggesting that the average is dominated by multi-threaded tests.

The 3DMark single-thread score of 960 and Cinebench R23 single-core of 3,191 show that the chip is not a single-thread specialist. Its single-thread performance is adequate but not exceptional, which is consistent with a mid-range desktop part that prioritizes core count over peak frequency. The data indicates a system where the CPU can feed a much stronger GPU than the one installed here — the processor's 77th percentile standing is roughly four times higher than the GPU's 18th percentile rank.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS rows exist for this exact CPU+GPU combination. The FACT PACK contains no measuredFps data, so all frame-rate figures discussed here are estimates derived from the benchmark scores rather than direct measurements.

Based on the GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 2,690 and its 18th percentile standing, gaming performance is expected to be limited to low-end territory. The nearest rivals — the GT 1030, GT 440, and Quadro K1100M — are all entry-level cards that are not typically associated with high-refresh or high-resolution gaming. At 1080p with ultra settings, this GPU would likely struggle to maintain consistently smooth frame rates in modern titles, though exact numbers cannot be provided from the data.

The CPU's strong multi-thread performance (22,604 in Cinebench R23) and 77th percentile ranking suggest it would not be the limiting factor in most gaming scenarios. Even at 1080p, where CPU overhead is highest, the i5-13400F's single-thread score of 3,191 in Cinebench R23 and 960 in 3DMark single-thread should be sufficient to drive frame rates in most games. The bottleneck will be the GPU.

For esports titles or older games with modest graphics requirements, the system may deliver playable frame rates, but the 18th percentile GPU ranking argues against expecting high-refresh experiences at competitive settings. At 1440p or 4K, the GPU would be even more constrained, and the CPU's performance advantage would be largely irrelevant. These are estimates based on benchmark scores, not measured results, and actual gaming performance could vary significantly depending on the title and settings.

Who Should Build It

This build targets users who prioritize CPU throughput over graphics performance. The i5-13400F's 77th percentile ranking and strong multi-thread scores make it a sensible choice for software developers compiling code, students running virtual machines or data analysis workloads, and small business workstations handling office productivity, spreadsheets, and database queries. The PassMark data compression score of 311,364 and data encryption score of 16,608 indicate solid performance for file archiving and encrypted storage tasks.

Content creators who work primarily with CPU-bound workloads — such as video encoding, batch photo processing, or 3D rendering — would benefit from the processor's 22,604 Cinebench R23 multi-core score. The 10-core, 16-thread configuration is well-suited for render farms or single-workstation rendering where the GPU is not the primary compute engine.

Gamers, however, should be cautious. The GPU's 18th percentile ranking and 2,690 Steel Nomad score suggest that this is not a gaming-focused build. For users who want to play modern titles at high settings, the graphics card would need to be upgraded or replaced. The CPU can certainly handle gaming workloads, but the system's overall gaming capability is constrained by the GPU.

Students and office workers who do not require graphics acceleration would find this a balanced system for everyday tasks. The CPU's single-thread performance (3,634 in PassMark single-thread) handles responsive application usage, while the multi-thread capability supports background tasks like antivirus scans, system indexing, and cloud sync clients.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Intel Core i5-13400F uses Intel Socket 1700, which supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory. This flexibility allows builders to choose between older, more affordable DDR4 modules or newer DDR5 kits, depending on motherboard selection and budget priorities — though pricing cannot be discussed here. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, which is sufficient for a single high-bandwidth GPU or a pair of Gen 4 drives.

The CPU's 65 W TDP is modest, and the GPU's TDP is 275 W. A sensible power supply would need to account for both components, though the data does not list a suggested PSU rating for this combination. The GPU requires a single 16-pin power connector and occupies a dual-slot form factor, measuring 245 mm in length, 115 mm in height, and 40 mm in width.

The most logical upgrade path for this system is to replace the GPU with a higher-performing model. The CPU's 77th percentile ranking and PCIe Gen 5 support mean it can drive substantially more powerful graphics cards without becoming a bottleneck. The i5-13400F's strong multi-thread scores (22,604 in Cinebench R23, 7,314 in 3DMark 16-thread) suggest it has headroom for several years of service in a gaming or content-creation rig.

Memory upgrades are also possible, given the dual-channel support for both DDR4 and DDR5. The L3 cache of 20 MB is shared across all cores, and the L2 cache of 1.25 MB per core provides 12.5 MB total. These figures are fixed by the silicon, so the only memory-related upgrade path is increasing system RAM capacity or switching between DDR4 and DDR5 platforms.

Balance and Bottleneck

The imbalance in this build is stark. The CPU is a top-quartile component (77th percentile), while the GPU is in the bottom quintile (18th percentile). For CPU-intensive workloads — compilation, rendering, data processing — the system performs well, as the processor is the primary compute engine. For GPU-intensive workloads — gaming, video encoding with NVENC, ray tracing — the graphics card is the clear limiting factor.

The GPU's benchmark score of 2,690 in 3DMark Steel Nomad is only 1% to 1.7% higher than its nearest rivals, which include the GT 1030 and GT 440. These are not high-performance cards, and the RTX 5070 SUPER's 18th percentile ranking confirms that it is not competitive with the broader GPU market. The 32.15 TFLOPS FP32 rating and 672.0 GB/s memory bandwidth are theoretically respectable, but the benchmark data suggests real-world performance is far below what those specifications imply.

The CPU's bottleneck potential is minimal in GPU-bound scenarios. Even at 1080p, where CPU overhead is highest, the i5-13400F's single-thread performance (960 in 3DMark single-thread, 3,634 in PassMark single-thread) should be sufficient to avoid limiting frame rates. The system is GPU-bound in gaming and graphics workloads, and CPU-bound in multi-threaded productivity tasks.

The 48th combined percentile reflects this split: the system is average overall, but for very different reasons on each side. The CPU boosts the system's productivity potential, while the GPU drags down its gaming and graphics capabilities. Users who understand this balance can make informed decisions about which workloads to prioritize.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build pairing the Intel Core i5-13400F with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER. The CPU is a 13th-generation Raptor Lake processor with 10 cores and 16 threads, while the GPU is a 50-series Blackwell 2.0 card with 18 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 192-bit bus.

The overall tier of this system is mid-range, driven by the 48th combined percentile. The CPU is the standout component at the 77th percentile, while the GPU at the 18th percentile significantly lowers the system's overall standing. This is not a balanced configuration — the processor is capable of supporting a much stronger graphics card, and the GPU is the weakest link in the chain.

The GPU's specifications are noteworthy on paper: 6,400 shading units, 50 RT cores, 200 tensor cores, and a 2,512 MHz boost clock. The 18 GB memory capacity is generous, and the 672.0 GB/s bandwidth is respectable. However, the benchmark data shows that these specifications do not translate into competitive performance — the card scores only 2,690 in 3DMark Steel Nomad, putting it in the bottom 18% of all GPUs.

The CPU, by contrast, delivers exactly what its specifications suggest. The 10-core, 16-thread configuration with a 4.60 GHz boost clock produces strong multi-threaded results across Cinebench, Geekbench, and PassMark. The 77th percentile ranking places it in the upper quarter of all processors, and its nearest rivals are all within 0.4% of its average score.

GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture using TSMC's 5 nm process. The GB205 chip contains 31,100 million transistors on a 263 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 118.3 million per square millimeter. The GPU has 6,400 shading units, 200 texture mapping units, and 80 raster output units. Ray tracing is handled by 50 RT cores, and AI acceleration by 200 tensor cores.

Memory is a standout feature: 18 GB of GDDR7 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 672.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock runs at 1,750 MHz with an effective rate of 28 Gbps. The base clock is 2,325 MHz, boosting to 2,512 MHz. Pixel rate is 201.0 GPixel/s, texture rate is 502.4 GTexel/s, and FP32 throughput is 32.15 TFLOPS, with FP16 at an identical 32.15 TFLOPS due to a 1:1 ratio.

The GPU's power draw is 275 W TDP, requiring a single 16-pin power connector. It occupies a dual-slot form factor and measures 245 mm in length, 115 mm in height, and 40 mm in width. Display outputs include one HDMI 2.1b port and three DisplayPort 2.1b ports. The bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x16, and API support includes DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Despite these specifications, the benchmark result is underwhelming. The single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,690 places the GPU at the 18th percentile among all graphics cards. Its nearest rivals are the Quadro K1100M, GT 1030, Arc Pro B50, and GT 440 — all low-end or legacy parts. The delta to each is 1% to 1.7%, meaning the RTX 5070 SUPER is barely faster than these dated cards.

For rendering workloads, the high memory capacity and bandwidth could theoretically support large textures and complex scenes, but the low benchmark score suggests the compute throughput is not sufficient to leverage that memory effectively. The ray tracing hardware (50 RT cores) and tensor cores (200) are present, but their real-world impact cannot be quantified from the available data. The 32.15 TFLOPS FP32 rating is a raw specification that does not align with the benchmark result, indicating that the card's theoretical peak performance is not achievable in practice.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: Not recommended. The GPU's 18th percentile ranking and 2,690 Steel Nomad score indicate that frame rates at high refresh rates (144 Hz or above) would be difficult to sustain, even at 1080p. The CPU is capable, but the GPU is the limiting factor.

Streaming: The CPU's multi-thread performance (22,604 Cinebench R23) can handle software encoding, while the GPU's tensor cores could theoretically accelerate encoding tasks. However, the GPU's low benchmark score suggests that streaming at high quality while gaming would be challenging, as the graphics card is already performance-constrained.

Video editing: The CPU's 10 cores and 16 threads provide solid performance for timeline editing and export tasks. The GPU's 18 GB of VRAM is useful for effects and color grading, but the low compute score may slow GPU-accelerated effects. The system is CPU-favorable for this workload.

3D rendering: CPU-based rendering (e.g., Cinebench) would perform well, given the 22,604 R23 multi-core score. GPU-based rendering would be limited by the card's 18th percentile performance, making this a poor choice for GPU-accelerated renderers.

Software development: The CPU's 77th percentile ranking and strong multi-thread scores (79,942 PassMark integer math) make this a suitable system for compilation, testing, and running virtual machines. The GPU's limitations are irrelevant for most development tasks.

Student and office work: The system handles word processing, spreadsheets, browsing, and communication tools with ease. The CPU's single-thread performance (3,634 PassMark) ensures responsive applications, and the 65 W TDP keeps power consumption reasonable. The GPU is overkill in memory capacity but underpowered in compute for any graphics-heavy academic work.