Core i5-10400F vs EPYC 4464P

CPU

GPU

Core i5-10400F

6 Cores12 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.3 GHz2020

Popular choices:

•••••••••

EPYC 4464P

12 Cores24 Thrd105 WWMax: 5.4 GHz2024

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i5-10400F

6 / 12

13,029

0.0%

47,185

+262.2%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX

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 $269 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $429 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 105W, a 40W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 4464P.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 4464P across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 47,185).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 32 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 4464P, which brings 12 cores / 24 threads and 28 PCIe lanes.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 81.4 vs 110.0 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $429 MSRP).

EPYC 4464P

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +55.0% 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: 12 cores / 24 threads, plus 28 PCIe lanes vs 16.
✅Delivers 35.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 110.0 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($429 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
✅Newer platform on AM5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌
168.1% HIGHER MSRP
$429 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 4464P

2024

Why buy it

✅Costs $269 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $429 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 105W, a 40W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 4464P.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +55.0% 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: 12 cores / 24 threads, plus 28 PCIe lanes vs 16.
✅Delivers 35.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 110.0 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($429 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 4464P across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 47,185).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 32 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 4464P, which brings 12 cores / 24 threads and 28 PCIe lanes.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 81.4 vs 110.0 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $429 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌
168.1% HIGHER MSRP
$429 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 4464P better than Core i5-10400F?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 4464P 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 4464P is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 55.0% more average FPS across 49 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 4464P is the better fit. You are getting 262.2% better PassMark, backed by 12 cores and 24 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 4464P is the smarter buy today. EPYC 4464P is 168.1% more expensive on MSRP at $429 MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you a 55.0% average FPS lead across 49 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 35.1% better value on MSRP (110.0 vs 81.4 PassMark/$), 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 4464P 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 12 cores / 24 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 4464P Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 4464P
1080p
low	192 FPS	252 FPS
medium	152 FPS	231 FPS
high	123 FPS	200 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	172 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	222 FPS
medium	119 FPS	183 FPS
high	97 FPS	153 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	135 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	154 FPS
medium	70 FPS	127 FPS
high	55 FPS	100 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	86 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open EPYC 4464P

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 4464P
1080p
low	326 FPS	585 FPS
medium	318 FPS	493 FPS
high	290 FPS	385 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	341 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	503 FPS
medium	292 FPS	444 FPS
high	267 FPS	352 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	294 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	297 FPS
medium	258 FPS	268 FPS
high	235 FPS	238 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	204 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open EPYC 4464P

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 4464P
1080p
low	326 FPS	1025 FPS
medium	326 FPS	1114 FPS
high	326 FPS	1037 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	875 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	938 FPS
medium	326 FPS	832 FPS
high	326 FPS	751 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	650 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	573 FPS
medium	326 FPS	492 FPS
high	289 FPS	442 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	373 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open EPYC 4464P

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 4464P
1080p
low	326 FPS	1180 FPS
medium	326 FPS	1015 FPS
high	326 FPS	942 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	828 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	1000 FPS
medium	326 FPS	873 FPS
high	326 FPS	748 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	634 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	678 FPS
medium	326 FPS	594 FPS
high	326 FPS	525 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	437 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open EPYC 4464P

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and EPYC 4464P

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 4464P

The EPYC 4464P 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 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 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: 47,185 points. Launch price was $399.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the EPYC 4464P offers 12 cores / 24 threads — the EPYC 4464P has 6 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5.4 GHz on the EPYC 4464P — a 22.7% clock advantage for the EPYC 4464P (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.7 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the EPYC 4464P uses Raphael (2023−2025) (5 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the EPYC 4464P's 47,185 — a 113.4% lead for the EPYC 4464P. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 32 MB (total) on the EPYC 4464P.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 4464P
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	12 / 24+100%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz	5.4 GHz+26%
Base Clock	2.9 GHz	3.7 GHz+28%
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	47,185+262%
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 4464P uses AM5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus 5200 on the EPYC 4464P — the EPYC 4464P 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 4464P) — the EPYC 4464P 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,FL1 (EPYC 4464P).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 4464P
Socket	LGA1200	AM5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 4.0+33%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	5200+129900%
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB+104857500%	128
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	28+75%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the EPYC 4464P has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the EPYC 4464P supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) vs VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V (EPYC 4464P). The EPYC 4464P 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 4464P rivals Core i9-13900.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 4464P
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	AMD Radeon Graphics
Unlocked	No	Yes
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V
Target Use	Gaming	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the EPYC 4464P debuted at $429. On MSRP ($160 vs $429), the Core i5-10400F is $269 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 110.0 pts/$ for the EPYC 4464P — making the EPYC 4464P the 29.8% better value option.