Core i5-10400F vs EPYC Embedded 8224P

CPU

GPU

Core i5-10400F

6 Cores12 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.3 GHz2020

Popular choices:

•••••••••

EPYC Embedded 8224P

24 Cores48 Thrd160 WWMax: 3 GHz2023

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i5-10400F

6 / 12

13,029

0.0%

48,869

+275.1%

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 $695 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $855 MSRP).
✅Delivers 42.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 57.2 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $855 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 160W, a 95W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC Embedded 8224P.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC Embedded 8224P across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 48,869).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC Embedded 8224P, which brings 24 cores / 48 threads and 96 PCIe lanes.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while EPYC Embedded 8224P moves to SP6 and DDR5.

EPYC Embedded 8224P

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +64.6% higher average FPS across 6 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 96 PCIe lanes vs 16.
✅Newer platform on SP6 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
✅500% more PCIe lanes (96 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 57.2 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($855 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌146.2% higher power demand at 160W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

EPYC Embedded 8224P

2023

Why buy it

✅Costs $695 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $855 MSRP).
✅Delivers 42.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 57.2 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $855 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 160W, a 95W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC Embedded 8224P.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +64.6% higher average FPS across 6 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 96 PCIe lanes vs 16.
✅Newer platform on SP6 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
✅500% more PCIe lanes (96 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC Embedded 8224P across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 48,869).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC Embedded 8224P, which brings 24 cores / 48 threads and 96 PCIe lanes.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while EPYC Embedded 8224P moves to SP6 and DDR5.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 57.2 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($855 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌146.2% higher power demand at 160W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC Embedded 8224P better than Core i5-10400F?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC Embedded 8224P 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 Embedded 8224P is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 64.6% more average FPS across 6 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC Embedded 8224P is the better fit. You are getting 275.1% 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 Embedded 8224P is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-10400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. EPYC Embedded 8224P is 434.4% more expensive on MSRP at $855 MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you a 64.6% average FPS lead across 6 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-10400F is also 42.5% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 57.2 PassMark/$), 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 Embedded 8224P is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2023 vs 2020), a healthier platform with SP6 and DDR5 instead of LGA1200, 433.3% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 12 MB), more multi-core headroom with 24 cores / 48 threads instead of 6/12, and AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. 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 Embedded 8224P Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	EPYC Embedded 8224P
1080p
low	192 FPS	157 FPS
medium	152 FPS	129 FPS
high	123 FPS	108 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	86 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	140 FPS
medium	119 FPS	112 FPS
high	97 FPS	88 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	71 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	67 FPS
medium	70 FPS	57 FPS
high	55 FPS	44 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	36 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open EPYC Embedded 8224P

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	EPYC Embedded 8224P
1080p
low	326 FPS	392 FPS
medium	318 FPS	348 FPS
high	290 FPS	284 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	227 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	330 FPS
medium	292 FPS	299 FPS
high	267 FPS	252 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	193 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	204 FPS
medium	258 FPS	187 FPS
high	235 FPS	159 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	128 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open EPYC Embedded 8224P

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	EPYC Embedded 8224P
1080p
low	326 FPS	858 FPS
medium	326 FPS	771 FPS
high	326 FPS	745 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	668 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	662 FPS
medium	326 FPS	576 FPS
high	326 FPS	548 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	487 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	434 FPS
medium	326 FPS	343 FPS
high	289 FPS	306 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	250 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open EPYC Embedded 8224P

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	EPYC Embedded 8224P
1080p
low	326 FPS	1018 FPS
medium	326 FPS	908 FPS
high	326 FPS	770 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	647 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	824 FPS
medium	326 FPS	708 FPS
high	326 FPS	597 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	488 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	597 FPS
medium	326 FPS	521 FPS
high	326 FPS	449 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	372 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open EPYC Embedded 8224P

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and EPYC Embedded 8224P

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 Embedded 8224P

The EPYC Embedded 8224P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Siena (2023−2024) architecture. It features 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 2.55 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: SP6. Thermal design power (TDP): 160 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 48,869 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the EPYC Embedded 8224P offers 24 cores / 48 threads — the EPYC Embedded 8224P has 18 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 3 GHz on the EPYC Embedded 8224P — a 35.6% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.9 GHz vs 2.55 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the EPYC Embedded 8224P uses Siena (2023−2024) (5 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the EPYC Embedded 8224P's 48,869 — a 115.8% lead for the EPYC Embedded 8224P. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 64 MB (total) on the EPYC Embedded 8224P.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	EPYC Embedded 8224P
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	24 / 48+300%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+43%	3 GHz
Base Clock	2.9 GHz+14%	2.55 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	64 MB (total)+433%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	1 MB (per core)+300%
Process	14 nm	5 nm-64%
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Siena (2023−2024)
PassMark	13,029	48,869+275%
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 Embedded 8224P uses SP6 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus 4800 on the EPYC Embedded 8224P — the EPYC Embedded 8224P supports 199.7% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC Embedded 8224P supports up to 1152 of RAM compared to 128 GB — 160% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-10400F) vs 6 (EPYC Embedded 8224P). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 96 (EPYC Embedded 8224P) — the EPYC Embedded 8224P offers 80 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and SP6 (EPYC Embedded 8224P).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	EPYC Embedded 8224P
Socket	LGA1200	SP6
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 4.0+33%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	4800+119900%
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB+11650744%	1152
RAM Channels	2	6+200%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	96+500%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the EPYC Embedded 8224P supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) vs VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V (EPYC Embedded 8224P). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; EPYC Embedded 8224P rivals Xeon Platinum 8452Y.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	EPYC Embedded 8224P
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	—	None
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V
Target Use	Gaming	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the EPYC Embedded 8224P debuted at $855. On MSRP ($160 vs $855), the Core i5-10400F is $695 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 57.2 pts/$ for the EPYC Embedded 8224P — making the Core i5-10400F the 35% better value option.