
Core i5-12400F
Popular choices:

EPYC 9634
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 i5-12400F
2022Why buy it
- ✅Costs $10,130 less on MSRP ($174 MSRP vs $10,304 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 971.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 112.3 vs 10.5 PassMark/$ ($174 MSRP vs $10,304 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 290W, a 225W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 9634.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9634 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (657 vs 85,000).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9634, which brings 84 cores / 168 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
EPYC 9634
2022Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +10.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 84 cores / 168 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.5 vs 112.3 PassMark/$ ($10,304 MSRP vs $174 MSRP).
- ❌346.2% higher power demand at 290W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-12400F.
Core i5-12400F
2022EPYC 9634
2022Why buy it
- ✅Costs $10,130 less on MSRP ($174 MSRP vs $10,304 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 971.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 112.3 vs 10.5 PassMark/$ ($174 MSRP vs $10,304 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 290W, a 225W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 9634.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +10.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 84 cores / 168 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9634 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (657 vs 85,000).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9634, which brings 84 cores / 168 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.5 vs 112.3 PassMark/$ ($10,304 MSRP vs $174 MSRP).
- ❌346.2% higher power demand at 290W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-12400F.
Quick Answers
So, is EPYC 9634 better than Core i5-12400F?
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 i5-12400F | EPYC 9634 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 183 FPS | 170 FPS |
| medium | 168 FPS | 141 FPS |
| high | 139 FPS | 122 FPS |
| ultra | 119 FPS | 96 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 148 FPS |
| medium | 132 FPS | 119 FPS |
| high | 106 FPS | 97 FPS |
| ultra | 89 FPS | 77 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 87 FPS | 70 FPS |
| medium | 81 FPS | 59 FPS |
| high | 64 FPS | 47 FPS |
| ultra | 49 FPS | 39 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 9634 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 471 FPS | 280 FPS |
| medium | 397 FPS | 246 FPS |
| high | 341 FPS | 202 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 166 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 407 FPS | 230 FPS |
| medium | 351 FPS | 207 FPS |
| high | 309 FPS | 175 FPS |
| ultra | 265 FPS | 139 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 282 FPS | 142 FPS |
| medium | 248 FPS | 130 FPS |
| high | 229 FPS | 117 FPS |
| ultra | 196 FPS | 98 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 9634 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 671 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 560 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 522 FPS |
| ultra | 488 FPS | 454 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 511 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 425 FPS |
| high | 485 FPS | 389 FPS |
| ultra | 434 FPS | 337 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 442 FPS | 376 FPS |
| medium | 389 FPS | 293 FPS |
| high | 337 FPS | 262 FPS |
| ultra | 274 FPS | 210 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 9634 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 899 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 819 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 706 FPS |
| ultra | 488 FPS | 621 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 722 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 629 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 538 FPS |
| ultra | 473 FPS | 459 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 518 FPS |
| medium | 450 FPS | 462 FPS |
| high | 391 FPS | 406 FPS |
| ultra | 330 FPS | 349 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-12400F and EPYC 9634

Core i5-12400F
Core i5-12400F
The Core i5-12400F is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 January 2022 (3 years ago). It is based on the Alder Lake-S (2022) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 4.4 GHz. L3 cache: 18 MB (total). L2 cache: 1.25 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 19,532 points. Launch price was $180.

EPYC 9634
EPYC 9634
The EPYC 9634 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 84 cores and 168 threads. Base frequency is 2.25 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 384 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm, 6 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 290 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 107,944 points. Launch price was $10,304.
Processing Power
The Core i5-12400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the EPYC 9634 offers 84 cores / 168 threads — the EPYC 9634 has 78 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.4 GHz on the Core i5-12400F versus 3.7 GHz on the EPYC 9634 — a 17.3% clock advantage for the Core i5-12400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2.25 GHz). The Core i5-12400F uses the Alder Lake-S (2022) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the EPYC 9634 uses Genoa (2022−2023) (5 nm, 6 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-12400F scores 19,532 against the EPYC 9634's 107,944 — a 138.7% lead for the EPYC 9634. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,700 vs 1,800, a 5.7% lead for the EPYC 9634 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 657 vs 85,000 (196.9% advantage for the EPYC 9634). L3 cache: 18 MB (total) on the Core i5-12400F vs 384 MB (total) on the EPYC 9634.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 9634 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 84 / 168+1300% |
| Boost Clock | 4.4 GHz+19% | 3.7 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz+11% | 2.25 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 18 MB (total) | 384 MB (total)+2033% |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core)+25% | 1 MB (per core) |
| Process | Intel 7 nm | 5 nm, 6 nm-29% |
| Architecture | Alder Lake-S (2022) | Genoa (2022−2023) |
| PassMark | 19,532 | 107,944+453% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 12,380 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,700 | 1,800+6% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 657 | 85,000+12838% |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-12400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the EPYC 9634 uses SP5 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 memory speed. The EPYC 9634 supports up to 6144 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 191.8% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-12400F) vs 12 (EPYC 9634). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-12400F) vs 128 (EPYC 9634) — the EPYC 9634 offers 108 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-12400F) and SoC (EPYC 9634).
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 9634 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | SP5 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 5.0+67% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 | DDR5-4800 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB | 6144 GB+4700% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 12+500% |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | 128+540% |
Advanced Features
Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i5-12400F) vs AMD-V (EPYC 9634). Primary use case: Core i5-12400F targets Gaming Performance/Value, EPYC 9634 targets Server/Datacenter. Direct competitor: Core i5-12400F rivals Ryzen 5 5600; EPYC 9634 rivals Xeon 8470.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 9634 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d, EPT | AMD-V |
| Target Use | Gaming Performance/Value | Server/Datacenter |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-12400F launched at $174 MSRP, while the EPYC 9634 debuted at $10304. On MSRP ($174 vs $10304), the Core i5-12400F is $10130 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-12400F delivers 112.3 pts/$ vs 10.5 pts/$ for the EPYC 9634 — making the Core i5-12400F the 165.9% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 9634 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $174-98% | $10304 |
| Performance per Dollar | 112.3+970% | 10.5 |
| Release Date | 2022 | 2022 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












