Core i5-13400F vs EPYC 7402P

CPU

GPU

Core i5-13400F

10 Cores16 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.6 GHz2023

Popular choices:

•••••••••

EPYC 7402P

24 Cores48 Thrd180 WWMax: 3.35 GHz2019

Popular choices:

••••i5-13400F•••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i5-13400F

10 / 16

25,029

0.0%

43,759

+74.8%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX

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 i5-13400F

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $1,084 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $1,280 MSRP).
✅Delivers 273.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 34.2 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $1,280 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 180W, a 115W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (25,029 vs 43,759).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 128 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7402P, which brings 24 cores / 48 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

EPYC 7402P

2019

Why buy it

✅+74.8% higher PassMark.
✅+540% larger total L3 cache (128 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 24 cores / 48 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 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 34.2 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($1,280 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌176.9% higher power demand at 180W 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

2023

EPYC 7402P

2019

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $1,084 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $1,280 MSRP).
✅Delivers 273.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 34.2 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $1,280 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 180W, a 115W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.

Why buy it

✅+74.8% higher PassMark.
✅+540% larger total L3 cache (128 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 24 cores / 48 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 43,759).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 128 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7402P, which brings 24 cores / 48 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 34.2 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($1,280 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌176.9% higher power demand at 180W 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 7402P?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 7402P 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 streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 7402P is the better fit. You are getting 74.8% better PassMark, backed by 24 cores and 48 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 540% larger total L3 cache (128 MB vs 20 MB).

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

Core i5-13400F is the smarter buy today. Core i5-13400F is $1,084 cheaper on MSRP at $196 MSRP versus $1,280 MSRP, and it gives you a 3.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that EPYC 7402P is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 74.8% better PassMark. It is also 273.5% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 34.2 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core i5-13400F is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2023 vs 2019) and a healthier platform with LGA1700 and DDR5 instead of SP3. 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 7402P Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 7402P
1080p
low	171 FPS	183 FPS
medium	158 FPS	159 FPS
high	132 FPS	124 FPS
ultra	112 FPS	100 FPS
1440p
low	143 FPS	153 FPS
medium	123 FPS	128 FPS
high	99 FPS	97 FPS
ultra	84 FPS	80 FPS
4K
low	81 FPS	71 FPS
medium	74 FPS	63 FPS
high	59 FPS	48 FPS
ultra	46 FPS	39 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 7402P

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 7402P
1080p
low	545 FPS	414 FPS
medium	464 FPS	369 FPS
high	389 FPS	303 FPS
ultra	356 FPS	242 FPS
1440p
low	458 FPS	339 FPS
medium	403 FPS	311 FPS
high	345 FPS	262 FPS
ultra	301 FPS	204 FPS
4K
low	280 FPS	209 FPS
medium	247 FPS	195 FPS
high	231 FPS	165 FPS
ultra	204 FPS	135 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 7402P

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 7402P
1080p
low	530 FPS	588 FPS
medium	449 FPS	492 FPS
high	415 FPS	437 FPS
ultra	375 FPS	365 FPS
1440p
low	490 FPS	493 FPS
medium	422 FPS	419 FPS
high	382 FPS	374 FPS
ultra	343 FPS	318 FPS
4K
low	393 FPS	372 FPS
medium	331 FPS	298 FPS
high	296 FPS	265 FPS
ultra	246 FPS	215 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 7402P

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 7402P
1080p
low	626 FPS	897 FPS
medium	626 FPS	817 FPS
high	626 FPS	705 FPS
ultra	626 FPS	611 FPS
1440p
low	626 FPS	709 FPS
medium	626 FPS	620 FPS
high	598 FPS	531 FPS
ultra	521 FPS	453 FPS
4K
low	535 FPS	502 FPS
medium	492 FPS	452 FPS
high	439 FPS	399 FPS
ultra	382 FPS	345 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 7402P

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and EPYC 7402P

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 7402P

The EPYC 7402P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 7 August 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Zen 2 (2017−2020) architecture. It features 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 3.35 GHz. L3 cache: 128 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm, 14 nm process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 180 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Eight-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 43,759 points. Launch price was $1,250.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the EPYC 7402P offers 24 cores / 48 threads — the EPYC 7402P has 14 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 3.35 GHz on the EPYC 7402P — a 31.4% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2.8 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the EPYC 7402P uses Zen 2 (2017−2020) (7 nm, 14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the EPYC 7402P's 43,759 — a 54.5% lead for the EPYC 7402P. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 128 MB (total) on the EPYC 7402P.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 7402P
Cores / Threads	10 / 16	24 / 48+140%
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz+37%	3.35 GHz
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	2.8 GHz+12%
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, 14 nm
Architecture	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)	Zen 2 (2017−2020)
PassMark	25,029	43,759+75%
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 7402P 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 7402P — the EPYC 7402P supports 199.4% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 7402P 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 7402P). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 128 (EPYC 7402P) — the EPYC 7402P 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 7402P).

Feature	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 7402P
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 7402P 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 7402P). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600; EPYC 7402P rivals Xeon Gold 6248.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 7402P
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 7402P debuted at $1280. On MSRP ($196 vs $1280), the Core i5-13400F is $1084 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 34.2 pts/$ for the EPYC 7402P — making the Core i5-13400F the 115.5% better value option.