Core i5-10400F vs EPYC 7453

CPU

GPU

Core i5-10400F

6 Cores12 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.3 GHz2020

Popular choices:

•••••••••

EPYC 7453

28 Cores56 Thrd225 WWMax: 3.45 GHz2021

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i5-10400F

6 / 12

13,029

0.0%

48,453

+271.9%

Ryzen Threadripper 3970X

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 $1,410 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $1,570 MSRP).
✅Delivers 163.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 30.9 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $1,570 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 225W, a 160W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 7453.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 7453 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 48,453).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7453, which brings 28 cores / 56 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

EPYC 7453

2021

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +15.3% 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: 28 cores / 56 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 30.9 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($1,570 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌246.2% higher power demand at 225W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

EPYC 7453

2021

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,410 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $1,570 MSRP).
✅Delivers 163.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 30.9 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $1,570 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 225W, a 160W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 7453.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +15.3% 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: 28 cores / 56 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 16.
✅700% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 7453 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 48,453).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7453, which brings 28 cores / 56 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 30.9 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($1,570 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌246.2% higher power demand at 225W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 7453 better than Core i5-10400F?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 7453 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 7453 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 15.3% 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 7453 is the better fit. You are getting 271.9% better PassMark, backed by 28 cores and 56 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 7453 is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-10400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. EPYC 7453 is 881.3% more expensive on MSRP at $1,570 MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you a 15.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-10400F is also 163.9% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 30.9 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

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

EPYC 7453 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2021 vs 2020), 433.3% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 12 MB), more multi-core headroom with 28 cores / 56 threads instead of 6/12, and AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. That extra compute headroom should age better as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

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 7453 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 7453
1080p
low	192 FPS	164 FPS
medium	152 FPS	135 FPS
high	123 FPS	114 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	90 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	143 FPS
medium	119 FPS	115 FPS
high	97 FPS	90 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	72 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	69 FPS
medium	70 FPS	58 FPS
high	55 FPS	45 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	37 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open EPYC 7453

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 7453
1080p
low	326 FPS	395 FPS
medium	318 FPS	350 FPS
high	290 FPS	287 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	229 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	334 FPS
medium	292 FPS	301 FPS
high	267 FPS	255 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	195 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	206 FPS
medium	258 FPS	189 FPS
high	235 FPS	161 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	129 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open EPYC 7453

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 7453
1080p
low	326 FPS	649 FPS
medium	326 FPS	530 FPS
high	326 FPS	471 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	413 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	502 FPS
medium	326 FPS	409 FPS
high	326 FPS	358 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	311 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	371 FPS
medium	326 FPS	289 FPS
high	289 FPS	246 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	199 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open EPYC 7453

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 7453
1080p
low	326 FPS	886 FPS
medium	326 FPS	807 FPS
high	326 FPS	696 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	611 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	696 FPS
medium	326 FPS	608 FPS
high	326 FPS	522 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	447 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	499 FPS
medium	326 FPS	445 FPS
high	326 FPS	390 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	338 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open EPYC 7453

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and EPYC 7453

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 7453

The EPYC 7453 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 15 March 2021 (4 years ago). It is based on the Milan (2021−2023) architecture. It features 28 cores and 56 threads. Base frequency is 2.75 GHz, with boost up to 3.45 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm+ process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 225 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 48,453 points. Launch price was $1,570.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the EPYC 7453 offers 28 cores / 56 threads — the EPYC 7453 has 22 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 3.45 GHz on the EPYC 7453 — a 21.9% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.9 GHz vs 2.75 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the EPYC 7453 uses Milan (2021−2023) (7 nm+). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the EPYC 7453's 48,453 — a 115.2% lead for the EPYC 7453. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 64 MB (total) on the EPYC 7453.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 7453
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	28 / 56+367%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+25%	3.45 GHz
Base Clock	2.9 GHz+5%	2.75 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	64 MB (total)+433%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	512 kB (per core)+100%
Process	14 nm	7 nm+-50%
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Milan (2021−2023)
PassMark	13,029	48,453+272%
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 7453 uses SP3 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus 3200 on the EPYC 7453 — the EPYC 7453 supports 199.5% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 7453 supports up to 4096 of RAM compared to 128 GB — 187.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-10400F) vs 8 (EPYC 7453). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 128 (EPYC 7453) — the EPYC 7453 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,C621A (EPYC 7453).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 7453
Socket	LGA1200	SP3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 4.0+33%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	3200+79900%
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB+3276700%	4096
RAM Channels	2	8+300%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	128+700%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the EPYC 7453 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. 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 7453 rivals Xeon Platinum 8362.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 7453
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	—	None
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
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 7453 debuted at $1570. On MSRP ($160 vs $1570), the Core i5-10400F is $1410 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 30.9 pts/$ for the EPYC 7453 — making the Core i5-10400F the 90.1% better value option.