Amazon has
Intel Core i5-13400F 4.6 GHz 10-Core LGA 1700 Desktop Processor on sale for
$184.99.
Shipping is free.
Best Buy via eBay has
Intel Core i5-13400F 4.6 GHz 10-Core LGA 1700 Desktop Processor on sale for
$184.99.
Shipping is free.
Best Buy has
Intel Core i5-13400F 4.6 GHz 10-Core LGA 1700 Desktop Processor on sale for
$184.99.
Shipping is free, otherwise choose free store pickup where stock permits.
Thanks to Staff Member
aepro for finding this deal
Note: Availability for free store pick up may vary by location.
Product Details:
- 10 cores (6 P-cores + 4 E-cores) and 16 threads
- Performance hybrid architecture integrates two core microarchitectures, prioritizing and distributing workloads to optimize performance
- Up to 4.6 GHz. 20M Cache
- Compatible with Intel 600 series and 700 series chipset-based motherboards
- Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0, and PCIe 5.0 & 4.0 support. Intel Optane Memory support. Intel Laminar RH1 Cooler included. Discrete graphics required
Top Comments
Depending on your application, you may also want to consider the slower, but higher value i3-12100F for $98. It's only roughly 10% slower in average computing and gaming tasks. It's perfect for a budget gaming computer.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/14499209...medi
If you are running CAD, editing video, or doing some multicore intensive loads, then the i5-13400 is about 40% faster for that.
The 13600k is the newer architecture, and has many benefits, including nearly double the L2 cache, that make it a big step up from any of those other chips.
27 Comments
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
Our community has rated this post as helpful. If you agree, why not thank Stng
This will explain it better.
https://cpu.userbenchma
The 13600k is the newer architecture, and has many benefits, including nearly double the L2 cache, that make it a big step up from any of those other chips.
This will explain it better.
https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Com...4134vs4144 [userbenchmark.com]
For example: You swap out your cpu for a new one, but change nothing else. You can use the site to compare your two individual scores.
For helping others it's rubbish, not to mention it has crazy bias.
Our community has rated this post as helpful. If you agree, why not thank Selman
Depending on your application, you may also want to consider the slower, but higher value i3-12100F for $98. It's only roughly 10% slower in average computing and gaming tasks. It's perfect for a budget gaming computer.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/14499209...medi
If you are running CAD, editing video, or doing some multicore intensive loads, then the i5-13400 is about 40% faster for that.
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
For example: You swap out your cpu for a new one, but change nothing else. You can use the site to compare your two individual scores.
For helping others it's rubbish, not to mention it has crazy bias.
Core count, thread count, stock GHz, release date, where it aligns on release tree, market share (I could see this being biased, but helpful), TDP, nm size.
Most of that is factual information that can help you decide how different CPUs are. If the user were asking if it were much different from a 12600k then the story would be different.
Core count, thread count, stock GHz, release date, where it aligns on release tree, market share (I could see this being biased, but helpful), TDP, nm size.
Most of that is factual information that can help you decide how different CPUs are. If the user were asking if it were much different from a 12600k then the story would be different.
As for the bias...that's well known. All one has to do is read the language they use when referring to AMD. It's so bad it's comical.
https://www.tomshardwar
The 13600k is the newer architecture, and has many benefits, including nearly double the L2 cache, that make it a big step up from any of those other chips.
https://www.cpubenchmar
As for the bias...that's well known. All one has to do is read the language they use when referring to AMD. It's so bad it's comical.
Maybe I'm plugged in more than the average reader, but I feel like I know the strengths and weaknesses of each company. I do like the market share graph too. As bias as you think it is, the sample size is significant enough to support decent data.
I disagree with your original opinion though. I do think it's good site for comparing CPUs. Get plenty of information you need to be informed. Also, if average benchmarks were consistently bad on the site, wouldn't you be concerned about the the batch of processer?
eg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nj4gn7o
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.