Core i5-10400F vs EPYC 7401

Intel

Core i5-10400F

6 Cores12 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.3 GHz2020

Popular choices:

VS
AMD

EPYC 7401

24 Cores48 Thrd155 WWMax: 3 GHz2017

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

2020

Why buy it

  • Costs $1,340 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $1,500 MSRP).
  • Delivers 121.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 36.9 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $1,500 MSRP).
  • Draws 65W instead of 155W, a 90W reduction.
  • Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 7401.

Trade-offs

  • Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 7401 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
  • Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 55,280).
  • Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 64 MB).
  • Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7401, which brings 24 cores / 48 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

EPYC 7401

2017

Why buy it

  • Better for gaming: +18.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
  • +433.3% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 12 MB).
  • Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 24 cores / 48 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 16.
  • 700% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

  • Lower PassMark per dollar, at 36.9 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($1,500 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
  • 138.5% higher power demand at 155W vs 65W.
  • No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 7401 better than Core i5-10400F?
Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 7401 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 7401 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 18.6% 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 7401 is the better fit. You are getting 324.3% better PassMark, backed by 24 cores and 48 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 433.3% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 12 MB).
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
EPYC 7401 is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-10400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. EPYC 7401 is 837.5% more expensive on MSRP at $1,500 MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you a 18.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-10400F is also 121.0% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 36.9 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Core i5-10400F is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2020 vs 2017). That makes it the safer long-term pick.

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.

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

PresetCore i5-10400FEPYC 7401
1080p
low192 FPS187 FPS
medium152 FPS165 FPS
high123 FPS132 FPS
ultra100 FPS105 FPS
1440p
low153 FPS153 FPS
medium119 FPS127 FPS
high97 FPS97 FPS
ultra79 FPS78 FPS
4K
low82 FPS71 FPS
medium70 FPS63 FPS
high55 FPS48 FPS
ultra43 FPS39 FPS
Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

PresetCore i5-10400FEPYC 7401
1080p
low326 FPS207 FPS
medium318 FPS188 FPS
high290 FPS160 FPS
ultra253 FPS131 FPS
1440p
low326 FPS178 FPS
medium292 FPS163 FPS
high267 FPS141 FPS
ultra234 FPS111 FPS
4K
low309 FPS112 FPS
medium258 FPS103 FPS
high235 FPS92 FPS
ultra199 FPS75 FPS
League of Legends

League of Legends

PresetCore i5-10400FEPYC 7401
1080p
low326 FPS620 FPS
medium326 FPS518 FPS
high326 FPS466 FPS
ultra326 FPS399 FPS
1440p
low326 FPS517 FPS
medium326 FPS432 FPS
high326 FPS378 FPS
ultra326 FPS325 FPS
4K
low326 FPS383 FPS
medium326 FPS308 FPS
high289 FPS270 FPS
ultra229 FPS220 FPS
Valorant

Valorant

PresetCore i5-10400FEPYC 7401
1080p
low326 FPS834 FPS
medium326 FPS758 FPS
high326 FPS651 FPS
ultra326 FPS561 FPS
1440p
low326 FPS667 FPS
medium326 FPS584 FPS
high326 FPS500 FPS
ultra326 FPS420 FPS
4K
low326 FPS475 FPS
medium326 FPS427 FPS
high326 FPS375 FPS
ultra326 FPS320 FPS

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and EPYC 7401

Intel

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.

AMD

EPYC 7401

The EPYC 7401 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 29 June 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Naples (2017−2018) architecture. It features 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB (total). L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: TR4. Thermal design power (TDP): 170 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Eight-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 55,280 points. Launch price was $1,850.

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the EPYC 7401 offers 24 cores / 48 threads — the EPYC 7401 has 18 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 3 GHz on the EPYC 7401 — a 35.6% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.9 GHz vs 2 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the EPYC 7401 uses Naples (2017−2018) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the EPYC 7401's 55,280 — a 123.7% lead for the EPYC 7401. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 64 MB (total) on the EPYC 7401.

FeatureCore i5-10400FEPYC 7401
Cores / Threads
6 / 12
24 / 48+300%
Boost Clock
4.3 GHz+43%
3 GHz
Base Clock
2.9 GHz+45%
2 GHz
L3 Cache
12 MB (total)
64 MB (total)+433%
L2 Cache
256K (per core)
512K (per core)+100%
Process
14 nm
14 nm
Architecture
Comet Lake (2020−2025)
Naples (2017−2018)
PassMark
13,029
55,280+324%
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 7401 uses TR4 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus 2666 on the EPYC 7401 — the EPYC 7401 supports 199.4% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 7401 supports up to 2048 of RAM compared to 128 GB 176.5% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-10400F) vs 8 (EPYC 7401). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 128 (EPYC 7401) — the EPYC 7401 offers 112 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and SP3 (EPYC 7401).

FeatureCore i5-10400FEPYC 7401
Socket
LGA1200
TR4
PCIe Generation
PCIe 3.0
PCIe 4.0+33%
Max RAM Speed
DDR4-2666
2666+66550%
Max RAM Capacity
128 GB+6553500%
2048
RAM Channels
2
8+300%
ECC Support
No
Yes
PCIe Lanes
16
128+700%
🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; EPYC 7401 rivals Xeon Silver 4114.

FeatureCore i5-10400FEPYC 7401
Integrated GPU
No
No
IGPU Model
None
Unlocked
No
No
AVX-512
No
No
Virtualization
VT-x, VT-d
VT-x, VT-d
Target Use
Gaming
💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the EPYC 7401 debuted at $1500. On MSRP ($160 vs $1500), the Core i5-10400F is $1340 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 36.9 pts/$ for the EPYC 7401 — making the Core i5-10400F the 75.4% better value option.

FeatureCore i5-10400FEPYC 7401
MSRP
$160-89%
$1500
Performance per Dollar
81.4+121%
36.9
Release Date
2020
2017