
Core i5-10400F
Popular choices:

EPYC 4345P
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.
Core i5-10400F
2020Why buy it
- ✅Costs $169 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 4345P.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 4345P across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 36,006).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 32 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 4345P, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads and 28 PCIe lanes.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 81.4 vs 109.4 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
EPYC 4345P
2025Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +44.1% higher average FPS across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+166.7% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 8 cores / 16 threads, plus 28 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅Delivers 34.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 109.4 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($329 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ✅Newer platform on AM5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌105.6% HIGHER MSRP$329 MSRPvs$160 MSRP
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Core i5-10400F
2020EPYC 4345P
2025Why buy it
- ✅Costs $169 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 4345P.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +44.1% higher average FPS across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+166.7% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 8 cores / 16 threads, plus 28 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅Delivers 34.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 109.4 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($329 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ✅Newer platform on AM5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 4345P across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 36,006).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 32 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 4345P, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads and 28 PCIe lanes.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 81.4 vs 109.4 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌105.6% HIGHER MSRP$329 MSRPvs$160 MSRP
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Quick Answers
So, is EPYC 4345P better than Core i5-10400F?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Games Benchmarks
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | EPYC 4345P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 192 FPS | 257 FPS |
| medium | 152 FPS | 239 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 207 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 178 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 220 FPS |
| medium | 119 FPS | 185 FPS |
| high | 97 FPS | 153 FPS |
| ultra | 79 FPS | 134 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 153 FPS |
| medium | 70 FPS | 128 FPS |
| high | 55 FPS | 100 FPS |
| ultra | 43 FPS | 86 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | EPYC 4345P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 630 FPS |
| medium | 318 FPS | 526 FPS |
| high | 290 FPS | 436 FPS |
| ultra | 253 FPS | 393 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 537 FPS |
| medium | 292 FPS | 470 FPS |
| high | 267 FPS | 395 FPS |
| ultra | 234 FPS | 337 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 309 FPS | 315 FPS |
| medium | 258 FPS | 281 FPS |
| high | 235 FPS | 265 FPS |
| ultra | 199 FPS | 232 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | EPYC 4345P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 900 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 747 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 664 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 570 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 725 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 581 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 504 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 425 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 501 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 415 FPS |
| high | 289 FPS | 373 FPS |
| ultra | 229 FPS | 311 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | EPYC 4345P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 900 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 900 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 856 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 772 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 855 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 756 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 663 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 579 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 570 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 509 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 459 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 400 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and EPYC 4345P

Core i5-10400F
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 4345P
EPYC 4345P
The EPYC 4345P 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 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 5.5 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: 36,006 points. Launch price was $329.
Processing Power
The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the EPYC 4345P offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the EPYC 4345P has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5.5 GHz on the EPYC 4345P — a 24.5% clock advantage for the EPYC 4345P (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.8 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the EPYC 4345P uses Grado (2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the EPYC 4345P's 36,006 — a 93.7% lead for the EPYC 4345P. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 32 MB (total) on the EPYC 4345P.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | EPYC 4345P |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 8 / 16+33% |
| Boost Clock | 4.3 GHz | 5.5 GHz+28% |
| Base Clock | 2.9 GHz | 3.8 GHz+31% |
| L3 Cache | 12 MB (total) | 32 MB (total)+167% |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 1 MB (per core)+300% |
| Process | 14 nm | 4 nm-71% |
| Architecture | Comet Lake (2020−2025) | Grado (2025) |
| PassMark | 13,029 | 36,006+176% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 8,191 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,454 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 5,783 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the EPYC 4345P uses AM5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus 5600 on the EPYC 4345P — the EPYC 4345P supports 199.7% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 128 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 28 (EPYC 4345P) — the EPYC 4345P offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and AM5 (EPYC 4345P).
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | EPYC 4345P |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1200 | AM5 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 4.0+33% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666 | 5600+139900% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB+104857500% | 128 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 28+75% |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the EPYC 4345P supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) vs AMD-V, IOMMU (EPYC 4345P). The EPYC 4345P includes integrated graphics (AMD Radeon Graphics), while the Core i5-10400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; EPYC 4345P rivals Xeon E-2488.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | EPYC 4345P |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | AMD Radeon Graphics |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | AMD-V, IOMMU |
| Target Use | Gaming | — |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the EPYC 4345P debuted at $329. On MSRP ($160 vs $329), the Core i5-10400F is $169 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 109.4 pts/$ for the EPYC 4345P — making the EPYC 4345P the 29.3% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | EPYC 4345P |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $160-51% | $329 |
| Performance per Dollar | 81.4 | 109.4+34% |
| Release Date | 2020 | 2025 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












