
Core i5-13400F
Popular choices:

EPYC 7532
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 $2,184 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $2,380 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 499.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 21.3 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $2,380 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 200W, a 135W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 7532.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (25,029 vs 50,726).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 256 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7532, which brings 32 cores / 64 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
EPYC 7532
2020Why buy it
- ✅+102.7% higher PassMark.
- ✅+1180% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 20 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 32 cores / 64 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 21.3 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($2,380 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌207.7% higher power demand at 200W 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 7532
2020Why buy it
- ✅Costs $2,184 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $2,380 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 499.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 21.3 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $2,380 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 200W, a 135W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 7532.
Why buy it
- ✅+102.7% higher PassMark.
- ✅+1180% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 20 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 32 cores / 64 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (25,029 vs 50,726).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 256 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7532, which brings 32 cores / 64 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 21.3 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($2,380 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌207.7% higher power demand at 200W 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 7532?
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 7532 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 171 FPS | 192 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 156 FPS |
| high | 132 FPS | 125 FPS |
| ultra | 112 FPS | 97 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 143 FPS | 156 FPS |
| medium | 123 FPS | 122 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 94 FPS |
| ultra | 84 FPS | 75 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 81 FPS | 73 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 60 FPS |
| high | 59 FPS | 47 FPS |
| ultra | 46 FPS | 38 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7532 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 545 FPS | 447 FPS |
| medium | 464 FPS | 386 FPS |
| high | 389 FPS | 312 FPS |
| ultra | 356 FPS | 246 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 458 FPS | 367 FPS |
| medium | 403 FPS | 326 FPS |
| high | 345 FPS | 271 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 208 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 280 FPS | 227 FPS |
| medium | 247 FPS | 205 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 171 FPS |
| ultra | 204 FPS | 138 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7532 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 722 FPS |
| medium | 449 FPS | 590 FPS |
| high | 415 FPS | 513 FPS |
| ultra | 375 FPS | 446 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 490 FPS | 587 FPS |
| medium | 422 FPS | 486 FPS |
| high | 382 FPS | 423 FPS |
| ultra | 343 FPS | 368 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 393 FPS | 426 FPS |
| medium | 331 FPS | 330 FPS |
| high | 296 FPS | 281 FPS |
| ultra | 246 FPS | 227 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7532 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 956 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 867 FPS |
| high | 626 FPS | 746 FPS |
| ultra | 626 FPS | 642 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 733 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 640 FPS |
| high | 598 FPS | 547 FPS |
| ultra | 521 FPS | 470 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 535 FPS | 522 FPS |
| medium | 492 FPS | 466 FPS |
| high | 439 FPS | 409 FPS |
| ultra | 382 FPS | 356 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and EPYC 7532

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 7532
EPYC 7532
The EPYC 7532 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2020-02-19. It is based on the Zen 2 (2017−2020) architecture. It features 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.3 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB. L2 cache: 16 MB. Built on 7 nm, 14 nm process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 200 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 50,726 points. Launch price was $2,300.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the EPYC 7532 offers 32 cores / 64 threads — the EPYC 7532 has 22 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 3.3 GHz on the EPYC 7532 — a 32.9% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the EPYC 7532 uses Zen 2 (2017−2020) (7 nm, 14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the EPYC 7532's 50,726 — a 67.8% lead for the EPYC 7532. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 256 MB on the EPYC 7532.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7532 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 10 / 16 | 32 / 64+220% |
| Boost Clock | 4.6 GHz+39% | 3.3 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz+4% | 2.4 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 20 MB (total) | 256 MB+1180% |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 16 MB+1180% |
| Process | Intel 7 nm | 7 nm, 14 nm |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) | Zen 2 (2017−2020) |
| PassMark | 25,029 | 50,726+103% |
| 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 7532 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 7532 — the EPYC 7532 supports 199.4% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 7532 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 7532). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 128 (EPYC 7532) — the EPYC 7532 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 7532).
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7532 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 7532 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600; EPYC 7532 rivals Xeon Gold 6338.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7532 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | — | None |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d |
| Target Use | Gaming | — |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the EPYC 7532 debuted at $2380. On MSRP ($196 vs $2380), the Core i5-13400F is $2184 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 21.3 pts/$ for the EPYC 7532 — making the Core i5-13400F the 142.8% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7532 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $196-92% | $2380 |
| Performance per Dollar | 127.7+500% | 21.3 |
| Release Date | 2023 | 2020 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













