Core i5-10400F vs EPYC 4245P

CPU

GPU

Core i5-10400F

6 Cores12 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.3 GHz2020

Core family

·······

Buy on Amazon

EPYC 4245P

6 Cores12 Thrd65 WWMax: 5.4 GHz2025

EPYC family

·······

Buy on Amazon

Core i5-10400F vs EPYC 4245P Performance Spectrum

Core i5-10400F

6 / 12

13,029

0.0%

31,135

+139.0%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Core i5-10400F vs EPYC 4245P FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core i5-10400F vs EPYC 4245P: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Why buy it

✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 4245P.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 4245P across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,191 vs 12,000).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 32 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 4245P, which brings 6 cores / 12 threads and 24 PCIe lanes.
❌Launch MSRP is still $160 MSRP, while EPYC 4245P mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

EPYC 4245P

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +31.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+166.7% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 6 cores / 12 threads, plus 24 PCIe lanes vs 16.
✅Newer platform on AM5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
✅50% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 4245P better than Core i5-10400F?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. EPYC 4245P makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i5-10400F is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, EPYC 4245P is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 31.5% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 4245P is the stronger fit. You are getting 46.5% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 166.7% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 12 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

EPYC 4245P is still the much better call for a fresh build. EPYC 4245P comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it still gives you a 31.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-10400F only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2020 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (81.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA1200.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

EPYC 4245P makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2020), a healthier platform with AM5 and DDR5 instead of LGA1200, 166.7% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 12 MB), more multi-core headroom with 6 cores / 12 threads instead of 6/12, and AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

Core i5-10400F vs EPYC 4245P Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core i5-10400F

The Core i5-10400F is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 April 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 2.9 GHz, with boost up to 4.3 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1200. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 13,029 points. Launch price was $155.

EPYC 4245P

The EPYC 4245P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 13 May 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Grado (2025) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 3.9 GHz, with boost up to 5.4 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: AM5. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 31,135 points. Launch price was $239.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core i5-10400F and EPYC 4245P share an identical 6-core/12-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5.4 GHz on the EPYC 4245P — a 22.7% clock advantage for the EPYC 4245P (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.9 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the EPYC 4245P uses Grado (2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the EPYC 4245P's 31,135 — a 82% lead for the EPYC 4245P. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 8,191 vs 12,000 (37.7% advantage for the EPYC 4245P). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 3,347, a 78.9% lead for the EPYC 4245P that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 5,783 vs 14,616 (86.6% advantage for the EPYC 4245P). L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 32 MB (total) on the EPYC 4245P.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 4245P
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	6 / 12
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz	5.4 GHz+26%
Base Clock	2.9 GHz	3.9 GHz+34%
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	32 MB (total)+167%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)+25500%	1 MB (per core)
Process	14 nm	4 nm-71%
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Grado (2025)
PassMark	13,029	31,135+139%
Cinebench R23 Multi	8,191	12,000+47%
Geekbench 6 Single	1,454	3,347+130%
Geekbench 6 Multi	5,783	14,616+153%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the EPYC 4245P uses AM5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus DDR5-5600 on the EPYC 4245P — the EPYC 4245P supports 110.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 4245P supports up to 256 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 24 (EPYC 4245P) — the EPYC 4245P offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and AM5 platform (EPYC 4245P).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 4245P
Socket	LGA1200	AM5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 4.0+33%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	DDR5-5600+110%
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	256 GB+100%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	24+50%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the EPYC 4245P supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) vs AMD-V (EPYC 4245P). The EPYC 4245P includes integrated graphics (Radeon Graphics (RDNA 2)), while the Core i5-10400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, EPYC 4245P targets Entry-level Server / Workstation. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; EPYC 4245P rivals Xeon E-2436.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 4245P
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	Radeon Graphics (RDNA 2)
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	AMD-V
Target Use	Gaming	Entry-level Server / Workstation