Core i5-10400F vs EPYC 9575F

CPU

GPU

Core i5-10400F

6 Cores12 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.3 GHz2020

Core family

·······

Buy on Amazon

EPYC 9575F

64 Cores128 Thrd400 WWMax: 5 GHz2024

EPYC family

·······

Buy on Amazon

Core i5-10400F vs EPYC 9575F Performance Spectrum

Core i5-10400F

6 / 12

13,029

0.0%

147,718

+1033.8%

Ryzen 9 7900X3D

Ryzen 9 9950X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX

Ryzen Threadripper 9970X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9995WX

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.

Core i5-10400F vs EPYC 9575F FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core i5-10400F vs EPYC 9575F: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Why buy it

✅Costs $11,631 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $11,791 MSRP).
✅Delivers 550.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 12.5 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $11,791 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 400W, a 335W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 9575F.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9575F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (5,783 vs 29,308).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9575F, which brings 64 cores / 128 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while EPYC 9575F moves to SP5 and DDR5.

EPYC 9575F

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +59.6% higher average FPS across 50 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 12.5 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($11,791 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌515.4% higher power demand at 400W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9575F better than Core i5-10400F?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. EPYC 9575F makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i5-10400F is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, EPYC 9575F is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 59.6% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests. It also has a clear cache advantage at 256 MB versus 12 MB.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9575F is the stronger fit. You are getting 406.8% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 64 cores and 128 threads. It also has 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 9575F is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-10400F is easier to justify if budget matters more than peak performance. EPYC 9575F comes in 7269.4% more expensive on MSRP at $11,791 MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it still gives you a 59.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-10400F is also 550.0% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 12.5 PassMark/$), which is why it can still make sense for tighter-budget builds on paper.

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

EPYC 9575F makes more sense long term 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 64 cores / 128 threads instead of 6/12. That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

Core i5-10400F vs EPYC 9575F Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

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 9575F

The EPYC 9575F is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 64 cores and 128 threads. Base frequency is 3.3 GHz, with boost up to 5 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 400 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 147,718 points. Launch price was $11,791.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the EPYC 9575F offers 64 cores / 128 threads — the EPYC 9575F has 58 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5 GHz on the EPYC 9575F — a 15.1% clock advantage for the EPYC 9575F (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3.3 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the EPYC 9575F uses Turin (2024) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the EPYC 9575F's 147,718 — a 167.6% lead for the EPYC 9575F. Multi-core Geekbench: 5,783 vs 29,308 (134.1% advantage for the EPYC 9575F). L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9575F.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 9575F
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	64 / 128+967%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz	5 GHz+16%
Base Clock	2.9 GHz	3.3 GHz+14%
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	256 MB (total)+2033%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)+25500%	1 MB (per core)
Process	14 nm	4 nm-71%
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Turin (2024)
PassMark	13,029	147,718+1034%
Cinebench R23 Multi	8,191	—
Geekbench 6 Single	1,454	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	5,783	29,308+407%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the EPYC 9575F 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 9575F — the EPYC 9575F supports 125.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9575F supports up to 6 TB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 4700% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-10400F) vs 12 (EPYC 9575F). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 128 (EPYC 9575F) — the EPYC 9575F 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 9575F).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 9575F
Socket	LGA1200	SP5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 5.0+67%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	DDR5-6000+125%
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 9575F). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, EPYC 9575F targets Data Center / High Frequency. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; EPYC 9575F rivals Xeon 6952P.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 9575F
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	AMD-V, SEV-SNP
Target Use	Gaming	Data Center / High Frequency

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core i5-10400F was priced at $160, while the EPYC 9575F came in at $11791. On launch pricing ($160 vs $11791), Core i5-10400F was $11631 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 12.5 pts/$ for the EPYC 9575F — making the Core i5-10400F the 146.7% better value option.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	EPYC 9575F
MSRP	$160-99%	$11791
Performance per Dollar	81.4+551%	12.5
Release Date	2020	2024

Search Core i5-10400F on Amazon

Search EPYC 9575F on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.