Core i5-13400F vs EPYC 4364P

CPU

GPU

Core i5-13400F

10 Cores16 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.6 GHz2023

Popular choices:

•••••••••

EPYC 4364P

8 Cores16 Thrd105 WWMax: 5.4 GHz2024

Popular choices:

••••i5-13400F•••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i5-13400F

10 / 16

25,029

0.0%

34,215

+36.7%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX

Ryzen Threadripper 7970X

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

2023

Why buy it

✅Costs $203 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $399 MSRP).
✅Delivers 48.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 85.8 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $399 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 105W, a 40W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 4364P.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 4364P across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (16,211 vs 21,000).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 32 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 4364P, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads and 28 PCIe lanes.
❌No integrated graphics, while EPYC 4364P can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

EPYC 4364P

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +33.3% higher average FPS across 50 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 Radeon Graphics, while Core i5-13400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 85.8 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($399 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌61.5% higher power demand at 105W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Core i5-13400F

2023

EPYC 4364P

2024

Why buy it

✅Costs $203 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $399 MSRP).
✅Delivers 48.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 85.8 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $399 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 105W, a 40W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 4364P.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +33.3% higher average FPS across 50 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 Radeon Graphics, while Core i5-13400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 4364P across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (16,211 vs 21,000).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 32 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 4364P, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads and 28 PCIe lanes.
❌No integrated graphics, while EPYC 4364P can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 85.8 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($399 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌61.5% higher power demand at 105W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 4364P better than Core i5-13400F?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 4364P makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i5-13400F 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 4364P is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 33.3% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 4364P is the better fit. You are getting 29.5% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 60% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 20 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

EPYC 4364P is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-13400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. EPYC 4364P is 103.6% more expensive on MSRP at $399 MSRP versus $196 MSRP, and it gives you a 33.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-13400F is also 48.9% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 85.8 PassMark/$), 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 4364P is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2023), 60% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 20 MB), more multi-core headroom with 8 cores / 16 threads instead of 10/16, 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 i5-13400F Benchmark Check

EPYC 4364P Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 4364P
1080p
low	171 FPS	249 FPS
medium	158 FPS	232 FPS
high	132 FPS	201 FPS
ultra	112 FPS	173 FPS
1440p
low	143 FPS	218 FPS
medium	123 FPS	183 FPS
high	99 FPS	152 FPS
ultra	84 FPS	134 FPS
4K
low	81 FPS	152 FPS
medium	74 FPS	127 FPS
high	59 FPS	99 FPS
ultra	46 FPS	86 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 4364P

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 4364P
1080p
low	545 FPS	710 FPS
medium	464 FPS	565 FPS
high	389 FPS	465 FPS
ultra	356 FPS	413 FPS
1440p
low	458 FPS	597 FPS
medium	403 FPS	499 FPS
high	345 FPS	417 FPS
ultra	301 FPS	351 FPS
4K
low	280 FPS	348 FPS
medium	247 FPS	297 FPS
high	231 FPS	278 FPS
ultra	204 FPS	241 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 4364P

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 4364P
1080p
low	530 FPS	855 FPS
medium	449 FPS	855 FPS
high	415 FPS	855 FPS
ultra	375 FPS	855 FPS
1440p
low	490 FPS	855 FPS
medium	422 FPS	855 FPS
high	382 FPS	790 FPS
ultra	343 FPS	656 FPS
4K
low	393 FPS	582 FPS
medium	331 FPS	500 FPS
high	296 FPS	450 FPS
ultra	246 FPS	380 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 4364P

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 4364P
1080p
low	626 FPS	855 FPS
medium	626 FPS	855 FPS
high	626 FPS	855 FPS
ultra	626 FPS	852 FPS
1440p
low	626 FPS	855 FPS
medium	626 FPS	855 FPS
high	598 FPS	766 FPS
ultra	521 FPS	647 FPS
4K
low	535 FPS	682 FPS
medium	492 FPS	600 FPS
high	439 FPS	531 FPS
ultra	382 FPS	437 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 4364P

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and EPYC 4364P

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 4364P

The EPYC 4364P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 21 May 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Raphael (2023−2025) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 4.5 GHz, with boost up to 5.4 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: AM5. Thermal design power (TDP): 105 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 34,215 points. Launch price was $399.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the EPYC 4364P 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 5.4 GHz on the EPYC 4364P — a 16% clock advantage for the EPYC 4364P (base: 2.5 GHz vs 4.5 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the EPYC 4364P uses Raphael (2023−2025) (5 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the EPYC 4364P's 34,215 — a 31% lead for the EPYC 4364P. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 16,211 vs 21,000 (25.7% advantage for the EPYC 4364P). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,407 vs 3,085, a 24.7% lead for the EPYC 4364P that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 11,408 vs 15,594 (31% advantage for the EPYC 4364P). L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 32 MB (total) on the EPYC 4364P.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 4364P
Cores / Threads	10 / 16+25%	8 / 16
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz	5.4 GHz+17%
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	4.5 GHz+80%
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	5 nm-29%
Architecture	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)	Raphael (2023−2025)
PassMark	25,029	34,215+37%
Cinebench R23 Multi	16,211	21,000+30%
Geekbench 6 Single	2,407	3,085+28%
Geekbench 6 Multi	11,408	15,594+37%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-13400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the EPYC 4364P uses AM5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 memory speed. Both support up to 192 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 28 (EPYC 4364P) — the EPYC 4364P offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-13400F) and B650,X670,X870 (EPYC 4364P).

Feature	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 4364P
Socket	LGA1700	AM5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200	DDR5-5200
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB	192 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	28+40%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the EPYC 4364P supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F) vs AMD-V, AMD-Vi (EPYC 4364P). The EPYC 4364P includes integrated graphics (Radeon Graphics), while the Core i5-13400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming, EPYC 4364P targets Entry Server. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600; EPYC 4364P rivals Xeon E-2488.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 4364P
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	Radeon Graphics
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	AMD-V, AMD-Vi
Target Use	Gaming	Entry Server

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the EPYC 4364P debuted at $399. On MSRP ($196 vs $399), the Core i5-13400F is $203 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 85.8 pts/$ for the EPYC 4364P — making the Core i5-13400F the 39.3% better value option.