Core i5-10400F vs EPYC 9355P

CPU

GPU

Core i5-10400F

6 Cores12 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.3 GHz2020

Popular choices:

•••••••••

EPYC 9355P

32 Cores64 Thrd280 WWMax: 4.4 GHz2024

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i5-10400F

6 / 12

13,029

0.0%

97,249

+646.4%

Ryzen 9 7945HX

Ryzen Threadripper 3970X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX

Ryzen Threadripper 7960X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

Ryzen Threadripper 7980X

Ryzen Threadripper 9980X

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 $2,838 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $2,998 MSRP).
✅Delivers 151.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 32.4 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $2,998 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 280W, a 215W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 9355P.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9355P across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 97,249).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9355P, which brings 32 cores / 64 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while EPYC 9355P moves to SP5 and DDR5.

EPYC 9355P

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +60.8% higher average FPS across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 32 cores / 64 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 16.
✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
✅700% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 32.4 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($2,998 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌330.8% higher power demand at 280W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

EPYC 9355P

2024

Why buy it

✅Costs $2,838 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $2,998 MSRP).
✅Delivers 151.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 32.4 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $2,998 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 280W, a 215W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 9355P.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +60.8% higher average FPS across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 32 cores / 64 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 16.
✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
✅700% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9355P across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 97,249).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9355P, which brings 32 cores / 64 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while EPYC 9355P moves to SP5 and DDR5.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 32.4 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($2,998 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌330.8% higher power demand at 280W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9355P better than Core i5-10400F?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 9355P 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 9355P is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 60.8% more average FPS across 8 shared CPU game tests. It also has a big cache advantage at 256 MB vs 12 MB.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9355P is the better fit. You are getting 646.4% better PassMark, backed by 32 cores and 64 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 2033.3% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 12 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

EPYC 9355P is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-10400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. EPYC 9355P is 1773.8% more expensive on MSRP at $2,998 MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you a 60.8% average FPS lead across 8 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-10400F is also 151.0% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 32.4 PassMark/$), 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 9355P is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2020), a healthier platform with SP5 and DDR5 instead of LGA1200, 3D V-Cache and a much larger 256 MB L3 cache instead of 12 MB, and more multi-core headroom with 32 cores / 64 threads instead of 6/12. 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 9355P Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 9355P
1080p
low	192 FPS	174 FPS
medium	152 FPS	144 FPS
high	123 FPS	124 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	101 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	152 FPS
medium	119 FPS	123 FPS
high	97 FPS	101 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	84 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	85 FPS
medium	70 FPS	73 FPS
high	55 FPS	58 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	48 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open EPYC 9355P

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 9355P
1080p
low	326 FPS	658 FPS
medium	318 FPS	566 FPS
high	290 FPS	459 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	397 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	548 FPS
medium	292 FPS	483 FPS
high	267 FPS	404 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	328 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	333 FPS
medium	258 FPS	295 FPS
high	235 FPS	268 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	236 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open EPYC 9355P

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 9355P
1080p
low	326 FPS	752 FPS
medium	326 FPS	638 FPS
high	326 FPS	593 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	521 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	561 FPS
medium	326 FPS	474 FPS
high	326 FPS	434 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	376 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	405 FPS
medium	326 FPS	326 FPS
high	289 FPS	288 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	229 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open EPYC 9355P

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 9355P
1080p
low	326 FPS	1018 FPS
medium	326 FPS	914 FPS
high	326 FPS	788 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	711 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	813 FPS
medium	326 FPS	707 FPS
high	326 FPS	606 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	535 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	577 FPS
medium	326 FPS	512 FPS
high	326 FPS	449 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	394 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open EPYC 9355P

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and EPYC 9355P

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 9355P

The EPYC 9355P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 3.55 GHz, with boost up to 4.4 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 280 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 97,249 points. Launch price was $2,998.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the EPYC 9355P offers 32 cores / 64 threads — the EPYC 9355P has 26 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 4.4 GHz on the EPYC 9355P — a 2.3% clock advantage for the EPYC 9355P (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.55 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the EPYC 9355P uses Turin (2024) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the EPYC 9355P's 97,249 — a 152.7% lead for the EPYC 9355P. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9355P.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 9355P
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	32 / 64+433%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz	4.4 GHz+2%
Base Clock	2.9 GHz	3.55 GHz+22%
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	256 MB (total)+2033%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	1 MB (per core)+300%
Process	14 nm	4 nm-71%
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Turin (2024)
PassMark	13,029	97,249+646%
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 9355P uses SP5 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus DDR5-6000 on the EPYC 9355P — the EPYC 9355P supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i5-10400F supports up to 128 GB of RAM compared to 6 TB — 182.1% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-10400F) vs 12 (EPYC 9355P). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 128 (EPYC 9355P) — the EPYC 9355P offers 112 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and SP5 (EPYC 9355P).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 9355P
Socket	LGA1200	SP5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 5.0+67%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	DDR5-6000+25%
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	6 TB+4700%
RAM Channels	2	12+500%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	128+700%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) vs AMD-V, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9355P). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, EPYC 9355P targets Data Center / Single Socket. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; EPYC 9355P rivals Xeon 6740P.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 9355P
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	AMD-V, SEV-SNP
Target Use	Gaming	Data Center / Single Socket

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the EPYC 9355P debuted at $2998. On MSRP ($160 vs $2998), the Core i5-10400F is $2838 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 32.4 pts/$ for the EPYC 9355P — making the Core i5-10400F the 86.1% better value option.