i5-10400 vs i9-13900K - The Last of Us Part I RX 6700 XT - Game Performance Benchmarks


i5-10400 i9-13900K

Multi-Thread Performance

12716 Pts
34549 Pts

Single-Thread Performance

2609 Pts
4683 Pts

The Last of Us Part I

i5-10400 vs i9-13900K in The Last of Us Part I using RX 6700 XT - CPU Performance comparison at Ultra, High, Medium, and Low Quality Settings with 1080p, 1440p, Ultrawide, 4K resolutions

i5-10400 i9-13900K

Ultra Quality
Resolution Frames Per Second
1080p
57.3 FPS
1080p
64.1 FPS
1440p
43.5 FPS
1440p
46.6 FPS
2160p
22.9 FPS
2160p
24.5 FPS
w1440p
35.5 FPS
w1440p
38.0 FPS
High Quality
Resolution Frames Per Second
1080p
98.3 FPS
1080p
108.1 FPS
1440p
77.6 FPS
1440p
82.3 FPS
2160p
44.5 FPS
2160p
47.2 FPS
w1440p
65.1 FPS
w1440p
69.1 FPS
Medium Quality
Resolution Frames Per Second
1080p
139.2 FPS
1080p
152.2 FPS
1440p
111.7 FPS
1440p
118.0 FPS
2160p
66.1 FPS
2160p
69.9 FPS
w1440p
94.8 FPS
w1440p
100.1 FPS
Low Quality
Resolution Frames Per Second
1080p
221.1 FPS
1080p
240.2 FPS
1440p
179.9 FPS
1440p
189.5 FPS
2160p
109.4 FPS
2160p
115.4 FPS
w1440p
154.0 FPS
w1440p
162.3 FPS
i5-10400
  • The i5-10400 has higher Level 2 Cache. Data/instructions which have to be processed can be loaded from the fast L2 and the CPU does not have to wait for the very slow DDR RAM
  • For some games, a cpu with a higher clock speed, or in a technical name IPC (Instructions per clock), has better results than other CPU's with higher core count and lower core speed.
  • The i5-10400 is more power efficient and generates less heat.
  • The i5-10400 has a higher turbo clock boost. Turbo Boost is a CPU feature that will run CPU clock speed faster than its base clock, if certain conditions are present. It will enable older software that runs on fewer cores, to perform better on newer hardware. Since games are software too, it is also applicable to them.
i9-13900K
  • The i9-13900K has higher Level 3 Cache. This is useful when you have substantial multiprocessing workloads, many computationally intense simultaneous processes. More likely on a server, less on a personally used computer for interactive desktop workloads.
  • The i9-13900K has more cores. The benefit of having more cores is that the system can handle more threads. Each core can handle a separate stream of data. This architecture greatly increases the performance of a system that is running concurrent applications.
  • The i9-13900K has more threads. Larger programs are divided into threads (small sections) so that the processor can execute them simultaneously to get faster execution.
  • The i9-13900K has a smaller process size. The faster a transistor can toggle on and off, the faster it can do work. And transistors that turn on and off with less energy are more efficient, reducing the operating power, or “dynamic power consumption,” required by a processor.

Compare i5-10400 vs i9-13900K specifications

i5-10400 vs i9-13900K Architecture

i5-10400 i9-13900K
CodenameComet LakeRaptor Lake-S
GenerationCore i5 (Comet Lake)Core i9 (Raptor Lake)
MarketDesktopDesktop
Memory SupportDDR4DDR4, DDR5 Dual-channel
Part#unknownSRMBH
Production StatusActiveActive

i5-10400 vs i9-13900K Cache

i5-10400 i9-13900K
Cache L164K (per core)80K (per core)
Cache L2256K (per core)2MB (per core)
Cache L312MB (shared)36MB (shared)

i5-10400 vs i9-13900K Cores

i5-10400 i9-13900K
# of Cores624
# of Threads1232
Integrated GraphicsUHD Graphics 630UHD Graphics 770
SMP # CPUs11

i5-10400 vs i9-13900K Features

i5-10400 i9-13900K

i5-10400 vs i9-13900K Notes

i5-10400 i9-13900K

i5-10400 vs i9-13900K Performance

i5-10400 i9-13900K
Base Clock100 MHz100 MHz
Frequency2.9 GHz3 GHz
Multiplier29.0x30.0x
Multiplier UnlockedNoYes
TDP65 W125 W
Turbo Clockup to 4.3 GHzup to 5.8 GHz

i5-10400 vs i9-13900K Physical

i5-10400 i9-13900K
Die Sizeunknown257 mm²
FoundryIntelIntel
PackageFC-LGA1200FC-LGA16A
Process Size14 nm10 nm
SocketIntel Socket 1200Intel Socket 1700
tCaseMax72°C72°C

Compare i5-10400 vs i9-13900K in more games


Discussion and Comments

Share Your Comments