
Core i5-10400F
Popular choices:

EPYC 9554P
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
2020Why buy it
- ✅Costs $6,944 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $7,104 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 451.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 14.8 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $7,104 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 360W, a 295W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 9554P.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9554P across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 104,920).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9554P, which brings 64 cores / 128 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while EPYC 9554P moves to SP5 and DDR5.
EPYC 9554P
2022Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +52.9% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 64 cores / 128 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
- ✅700% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 14.8 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($7,104 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ❌453.8% higher power demand at 360W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Core i5-10400F
2020EPYC 9554P
2022Why buy it
- ✅Costs $6,944 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $7,104 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 451.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 14.8 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $7,104 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 360W, a 295W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 9554P.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +52.9% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 64 cores / 128 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
- ✅700% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9554P across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 104,920).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9554P, which brings 64 cores / 128 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while EPYC 9554P moves to SP5 and DDR5.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 14.8 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($7,104 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ❌453.8% higher power demand at 360W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Quick Answers
So, is EPYC 9554P better than Core i5-10400F?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Games Benchmarks
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
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | EPYC 9554P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 192 FPS | 171 FPS |
| medium | 152 FPS | 142 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 122 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 96 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 149 FPS |
| medium | 119 FPS | 120 FPS |
| high | 97 FPS | 97 FPS |
| ultra | 79 FPS | 77 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 70 FPS |
| medium | 70 FPS | 60 FPS |
| high | 55 FPS | 47 FPS |
| ultra | 43 FPS | 39 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | EPYC 9554P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 533 FPS |
| medium | 318 FPS | 465 FPS |
| high | 290 FPS | 373 FPS |
| ultra | 253 FPS | 303 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 438 FPS |
| medium | 292 FPS | 392 FPS |
| high | 267 FPS | 323 FPS |
| ultra | 234 FPS | 255 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 309 FPS | 270 FPS |
| medium | 258 FPS | 246 FPS |
| high | 235 FPS | 216 FPS |
| ultra | 199 FPS | 179 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | EPYC 9554P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 673 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 562 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 523 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 455 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 511 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 426 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 390 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 337 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 377 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 295 FPS |
| high | 289 FPS | 263 FPS |
| ultra | 229 FPS | 211 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | EPYC 9554P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 905 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 823 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 709 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 626 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 726 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 633 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 541 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 463 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 521 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 465 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 408 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 351 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and EPYC 9554P

Core i5-10400F
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 9554P
EPYC 9554P
The EPYC 9554P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 November 2022 (3 years ago). It is based on the Genoa (2022−2023) architecture. It features 64 cores and 128 threads. Base frequency is 3.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.75 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm, 6 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 360 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 104,920 points. Launch price was $7,104.
Processing Power
The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the EPYC 9554P offers 64 cores / 128 threads — the EPYC 9554P has 58 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 3.75 GHz on the EPYC 9554P — a 13.7% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.1 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the EPYC 9554P uses Genoa (2022−2023) (5 nm, 6 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the EPYC 9554P's 104,920 — a 155.8% lead for the EPYC 9554P. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9554P.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | EPYC 9554P |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 64 / 128+967% |
| Boost Clock | 4.3 GHz+15% | 3.75 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.9 GHz | 3.1 GHz+7% |
| L3 Cache | 12 MB (total) | 256 MB (total)+2033% |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 1 MB (per core)+300% |
| Process | 14 nm | 5 nm, 6 nm-64% |
| Architecture | Comet Lake (2020−2025) | Genoa (2022−2023) |
| PassMark | 13,029 | 104,920+705% |
| 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 9554P uses SP5 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus DDR5-4800 on the EPYC 9554P — the EPYC 9554P 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 9554P). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 128 (EPYC 9554P) — the EPYC 9554P 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 9554P).
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | EPYC 9554P |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1200 | SP5 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 5.0+67% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666 | DDR5-4800+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 9554P). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, EPYC 9554P targets Data Center / Single Socket. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; EPYC 9554P rivals Xeon 8468.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | EPYC 9554P |
|---|---|---|
| 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 9554P debuted at $7104. On MSRP ($160 vs $7104), the Core i5-10400F is $6944 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 14.8 pts/$ for the EPYC 9554P — making the Core i5-10400F the 138.6% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | EPYC 9554P |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $160-98% | $7104 |
| Performance per Dollar | 81.4+450% | 14.8 |
| Release Date | 2020 | 2022 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












