
Core i5-13400F
Popular choices:

EPYC 7313P
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
- ✅Better for gaming: +5.6% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $717 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $913 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 184.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 44.9 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $913 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 155W, a 90W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (25,029 vs 41,017).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 128 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7313P, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
EPYC 7313P
2021Why buy it
- ✅+63.9% higher PassMark.
- ✅+540% larger total L3 cache (128 MB vs 20 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 44.9 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($913 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌138.5% higher power demand at 155W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Core i5-13400F
2023EPYC 7313P
2021Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +5.6% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $717 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $913 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 184.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 44.9 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $913 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 155W, a 90W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
Why buy it
- ✅+63.9% higher PassMark.
- ✅+540% larger total L3 cache (128 MB vs 20 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (25,029 vs 41,017).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 128 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7313P, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 44.9 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($913 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌138.5% higher power demand at 155W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i5-13400F better than EPYC 7313P?
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 7313P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 171 FPS | 166 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 136 FPS |
| high | 132 FPS | 116 FPS |
| ultra | 112 FPS | 91 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 143 FPS | 147 FPS |
| medium | 123 FPS | 118 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 94 FPS |
| ultra | 84 FPS | 75 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 81 FPS | 69 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 59 FPS |
| high | 59 FPS | 46 FPS |
| ultra | 46 FPS | 38 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7313P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 545 FPS | 505 FPS |
| medium | 464 FPS | 441 FPS |
| high | 389 FPS | 354 FPS |
| ultra | 356 FPS | 287 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 458 FPS | 415 FPS |
| medium | 403 FPS | 372 FPS |
| high | 345 FPS | 307 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 242 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 280 FPS | 255 FPS |
| medium | 247 FPS | 233 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 205 FPS |
| ultra | 204 FPS | 170 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7313P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 665 FPS |
| medium | 449 FPS | 555 FPS |
| high | 415 FPS | 518 FPS |
| ultra | 375 FPS | 451 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 490 FPS | 504 FPS |
| medium | 422 FPS | 419 FPS |
| high | 382 FPS | 385 FPS |
| ultra | 343 FPS | 333 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 393 FPS | 372 FPS |
| medium | 331 FPS | 290 FPS |
| high | 296 FPS | 260 FPS |
| ultra | 246 FPS | 209 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7313P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 903 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 822 FPS |
| high | 626 FPS | 708 FPS |
| ultra | 626 FPS | 624 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 721 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 628 FPS |
| high | 598 FPS | 538 FPS |
| ultra | 521 FPS | 460 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 535 FPS | 517 FPS |
| medium | 492 FPS | 462 FPS |
| high | 439 FPS | 406 FPS |
| ultra | 382 FPS | 349 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and EPYC 7313P

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 7313P
EPYC 7313P
The EPYC 7313P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 15 March 2021 (4 years ago). It is based on the Milan (2021−2023) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 128 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm+ process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 155 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 41,017 points. Launch price was $913.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the EPYC 7313P offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the EPYC 7313P has 6 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 3.7 GHz on the EPYC 7313P — a 21.7% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 3 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the EPYC 7313P uses Milan (2021−2023) (7 nm+). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the EPYC 7313P's 41,017 — a 48.4% lead for the EPYC 7313P. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 128 MB (total) on the EPYC 7313P.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7313P |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 10 / 16 | 16 / 32+60% |
| Boost Clock | 4.6 GHz+24% | 3.7 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz | 3 GHz+20% |
| L3 Cache | 20 MB (total) | 128 MB (total)+540% |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core)+150% | 512 kB (per core) |
| Process | Intel 7 nm | 7 nm+ |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) | Milan (2021−2023) |
| PassMark | 25,029 | 41,017+64% |
| 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 7313P uses SP3 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-13400F versus 3200 on the EPYC 7313P — the EPYC 7313P supports 199.4% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 7313P supports up to 4096 of RAM compared to 192 GB — 182.1% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-13400F) vs 8 (EPYC 7313P). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 128 (EPYC 7313P) — the EPYC 7313P offers 108 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-13400F) and SP3 (EPYC 7313P).
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7313P |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | SP3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 | 3200+63900% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 192 GB+4915100% | 4096 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 8+300% |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | 128+540% |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the EPYC 7313P supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F) vs VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V (EPYC 7313P). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600; EPYC 7313P rivals Xeon Gold 6334.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7313P |
|---|---|---|
| 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 i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the EPYC 7313P debuted at $913. On MSRP ($196 vs $913), the Core i5-13400F is $717 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 44.9 pts/$ for the EPYC 7313P — making the Core i5-13400F the 95.9% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7313P |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $196-79% | $913 |
| Performance per Dollar | 127.7+184% | 44.9 |
| Release Date | 2023 | 2021 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













