Core i5-10400F vs EPYC 4364P

CPU

GPU

Core i5-10400F

6 Cores12 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.3 GHz2020

Popular choices:

•••••••••

EPYC 4364P

8 Cores16 Thrd105 WWMax: 5.4 GHz2024

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i5-10400F

6 / 12

13,029

0.0%

34,215

+162.6%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX

Ryzen Threadripper 7970X

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

2020

Why buy it

✅Costs $239 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $399 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 105W, a 40W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 4364P.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 4364P across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,191 vs 21,000).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 32 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 4364P, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads and 28 PCIe lanes.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while EPYC 4364P moves to AM5 and DDR5.

EPYC 4364P

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +58.6% 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: 8 cores / 16 threads, plus 28 PCIe lanes vs 16.
✅Newer platform on AM5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
✅75% more PCIe lanes (28 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌
149.4% HIGHER MSRP
$399 MSRPvs$160 MSRP
❌61.5% higher power demand at 105W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

EPYC 4364P

2024

Why buy it

✅Costs $239 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $399 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 105W, a 40W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 4364P.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +58.6% 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: 8 cores / 16 threads, plus 28 PCIe lanes vs 16.
✅Newer platform on AM5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
✅75% more PCIe lanes (28 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 4364P across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,191 vs 21,000).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 32 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 4364P, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads and 28 PCIe lanes.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while EPYC 4364P moves to AM5 and DDR5.

Trade-offs

❌
149.4% HIGHER MSRP
$399 MSRPvs$160 MSRP
❌61.5% higher power demand at 105W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 4364P better than Core i5-10400F?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 4364P makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i5-10400F is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, EPYC 4364P is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 58.6% 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 4364P is the better fit. You are getting 156.4% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads. It also carries 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 4364P is the smarter buy today. EPYC 4364P is 149.4% more expensive on MSRP at $399 MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you a 58.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 5.3% better value on MSRP (85.8 vs 81.4 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

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

EPYC 4364P is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 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 8 cores / 16 threads instead of 6/12, and AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. That should give you a better long-term upgrade path for motherboard, RAM, and future CPU swaps.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

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.

Core i5-10400F Benchmark Check

EPYC 4364P Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 4364P
1080p
low	192 FPS	249 FPS
medium	152 FPS	232 FPS
high	123 FPS	201 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	173 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	218 FPS
medium	119 FPS	183 FPS
high	97 FPS	152 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	134 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	152 FPS
medium	70 FPS	127 FPS
high	55 FPS	99 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	86 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open EPYC 4364P

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 4364P
1080p
low	326 FPS	710 FPS
medium	318 FPS	565 FPS
high	290 FPS	465 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	413 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	597 FPS
medium	292 FPS	499 FPS
high	267 FPS	417 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	351 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	348 FPS
medium	258 FPS	297 FPS
high	235 FPS	278 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	241 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open EPYC 4364P

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 4364P
1080p
low	326 FPS	855 FPS
medium	326 FPS	855 FPS
high	326 FPS	855 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	855 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	855 FPS
medium	326 FPS	855 FPS
high	326 FPS	790 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	656 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	582 FPS
medium	326 FPS	500 FPS
high	289 FPS	450 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	380 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open EPYC 4364P

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 4364P
1080p
low	326 FPS	855 FPS
medium	326 FPS	855 FPS
high	326 FPS	855 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	852 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	855 FPS
medium	326 FPS	855 FPS
high	326 FPS	766 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	647 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	682 FPS
medium	326 FPS	600 FPS
high	326 FPS	531 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	437 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open EPYC 4364P

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and EPYC 4364P

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 4364P

The EPYC 4364P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 21 May 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Raphael (2023−2025) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 4.5 GHz, with boost up to 5.4 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: AM5. Thermal design power (TDP): 105 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 34,215 points. Launch price was $399.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the EPYC 4364P offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the EPYC 4364P has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5.4 GHz on the EPYC 4364P — a 22.7% clock advantage for the EPYC 4364P (base: 2.9 GHz vs 4.5 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the EPYC 4364P uses Raphael (2023−2025) (5 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the EPYC 4364P's 34,215 — a 89.7% lead for the EPYC 4364P. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 8,191 vs 21,000 (87.8% advantage for the EPYC 4364P). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 3,085, a 71.9% lead for the EPYC 4364P that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 5,783 vs 15,594 (91.8% advantage for the EPYC 4364P). L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 32 MB (total) on the EPYC 4364P.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 4364P
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	8 / 16+33%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz	5.4 GHz+26%
Base Clock	2.9 GHz	4.5 GHz+55%
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	32 MB (total)+167%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	1 MB (per core)+300%
Process	14 nm	5 nm-64%
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Raphael (2023−2025)
PassMark	13,029	34,215+163%
Cinebench R23 Multi	8,191	21,000+156%
Geekbench 6 Single	1,454	3,085+112%
Geekbench 6 Multi	5,783	15,594+170%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the EPYC 4364P uses AM5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus DDR5-5200 on the EPYC 4364P — the EPYC 4364P supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 4364P supports up to 192 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 40% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 28 (EPYC 4364P) — the EPYC 4364P offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and B650,X670,X870 (EPYC 4364P).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 4364P
Socket	LGA1200	AM5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 4.0+33%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	DDR5-5200+25%
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	192 GB+50%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	28+75%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the EPYC 4364P supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) vs AMD-V, AMD-Vi (EPYC 4364P). The EPYC 4364P includes integrated graphics (Radeon Graphics), while the Core i5-10400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, EPYC 4364P targets Entry Server. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; EPYC 4364P rivals Xeon E-2488.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 4364P
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	Radeon Graphics
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	AMD-V, AMD-Vi
Target Use	Gaming	Entry Server

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the EPYC 4364P debuted at $399. On MSRP ($160 vs $399), the Core i5-10400F is $239 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 85.8 pts/$ for the EPYC 4364P — making the EPYC 4364P the 5.2% better value option.