
Core i5-13400F
Popular choices:

EPYC 4345P
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 i5-13400F
2023Why buy it
- ✅Costs $133 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 16.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 109.4 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 4345P.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 4345P across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (25,029 vs 36,006).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 32 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 4345P, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads and 28 PCIe lanes.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while EPYC 4345P can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
EPYC 4345P
2025Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +21.4% higher average FPS across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+60% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 20 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 8 cores / 16 threads, plus 28 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅40% more PCIe lanes (28 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with AMD Radeon Graphics, while Core i5-13400F needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 109.4 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($329 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Core i5-13400F
2023EPYC 4345P
2025Why buy it
- ✅Costs $133 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 16.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 109.4 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 4345P.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +21.4% higher average FPS across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+60% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 20 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 8 cores / 16 threads, plus 28 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅40% more PCIe lanes (28 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with AMD Radeon Graphics, while Core i5-13400F needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 4345P across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (25,029 vs 36,006).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 32 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 4345P, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads and 28 PCIe lanes.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while EPYC 4345P can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 109.4 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($329 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Quick Answers
So, is EPYC 4345P better than Core i5-13400F?
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 i5-13400F | EPYC 4345P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 171 FPS | 257 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 239 FPS |
| high | 132 FPS | 207 FPS |
| ultra | 112 FPS | 178 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 143 FPS | 220 FPS |
| medium | 123 FPS | 185 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 153 FPS |
| ultra | 84 FPS | 134 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 81 FPS | 153 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 128 FPS |
| high | 59 FPS | 100 FPS |
| ultra | 46 FPS | 86 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 4345P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 545 FPS | 630 FPS |
| medium | 464 FPS | 526 FPS |
| high | 389 FPS | 436 FPS |
| ultra | 356 FPS | 393 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 458 FPS | 537 FPS |
| medium | 403 FPS | 470 FPS |
| high | 345 FPS | 395 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 337 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 280 FPS | 315 FPS |
| medium | 247 FPS | 281 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 265 FPS |
| ultra | 204 FPS | 232 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 4345P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 900 FPS |
| medium | 449 FPS | 747 FPS |
| high | 415 FPS | 664 FPS |
| ultra | 375 FPS | 570 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 490 FPS | 725 FPS |
| medium | 422 FPS | 581 FPS |
| high | 382 FPS | 504 FPS |
| ultra | 343 FPS | 425 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 393 FPS | 501 FPS |
| medium | 331 FPS | 415 FPS |
| high | 296 FPS | 373 FPS |
| ultra | 246 FPS | 311 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 4345P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 900 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 900 FPS |
| high | 626 FPS | 856 FPS |
| ultra | 626 FPS | 772 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 855 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 756 FPS |
| high | 598 FPS | 663 FPS |
| ultra | 521 FPS | 579 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 535 FPS | 570 FPS |
| medium | 492 FPS | 509 FPS |
| high | 439 FPS | 459 FPS |
| ultra | 382 FPS | 400 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and EPYC 4345P

Core i5-13400F
Core i5-13400F
The Core i5-13400F is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 January 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture. It features 10 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 4.6 GHz. L3 cache: 20 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, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 25,029 points. Launch price was $196.

EPYC 4345P
EPYC 4345P
The EPYC 4345P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 13 May 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Grado (2025) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 5.5 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: AM5. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 36,006 points. Launch price was $329.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the EPYC 4345P offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Core i5-13400F has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 5.5 GHz on the EPYC 4345P — a 17.8% clock advantage for the EPYC 4345P (base: 2.5 GHz vs 3.8 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the EPYC 4345P uses Grado (2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the EPYC 4345P's 36,006 — a 36% lead for the EPYC 4345P. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 32 MB (total) on the EPYC 4345P.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 4345P |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 10 / 16+25% | 8 / 16 |
| Boost Clock | 4.6 GHz | 5.5 GHz+20% |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz | 3.8 GHz+52% |
| L3 Cache | 20 MB (total) | 32 MB (total)+60% |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core)+25% | 1 MB (per core) |
| Process | Intel 7 nm | 4 nm-43% |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) | Grado (2025) |
| PassMark | 25,029 | 36,006+44% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 16,211 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 2,407 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 11,408 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-13400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the EPYC 4345P uses AM5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-13400F versus 5600 on the EPYC 4345P — the EPYC 4345P supports 199.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i5-13400F supports up to 192 GB of RAM compared to 128 — 40% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 28 (EPYC 4345P) — the EPYC 4345P offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-13400F) and AM5 (EPYC 4345P).
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 4345P |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | AM5 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 | 5600+111900% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 192 GB+157286300% | 128 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | 28+40% |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the EPYC 4345P supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F) vs AMD-V, IOMMU (EPYC 4345P). The EPYC 4345P includes integrated graphics (AMD Radeon Graphics), while the Core i5-13400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600; EPYC 4345P rivals Xeon E-2488.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 4345P |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | AMD Radeon Graphics |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | AMD-V, IOMMU |
| Target Use | Gaming | — |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the EPYC 4345P debuted at $329. On MSRP ($196 vs $329), the Core i5-13400F is $133 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 109.4 pts/$ for the EPYC 4345P — making the Core i5-13400F the 15.4% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 4345P |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $196-40% | $329 |
| Performance per Dollar | 127.7+17% | 109.4 |
| Release Date | 2023 | 2025 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













