
Core i5-13400F
Popular choices:

EPYC 7C13
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
- ✅+56.5% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
- ✅Costs $1,804 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $2,000 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 234.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 38.2 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $2,000 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 225W, a 160W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (11,408 vs 37,000).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 256 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7C13, which brings 64 cores / 128 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
EPYC 7C13
2021Why buy it
- ✅+224.3% higher Geekbench multi-core.
- ✅+1180% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 20 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 64 cores / 128 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (1,538 vs 2,407).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 38.2 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($2,000 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌246.2% higher power demand at 225W 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 7C13
2021Why buy it
- ✅+56.5% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
- ✅Costs $1,804 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $2,000 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 234.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 38.2 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $2,000 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 225W, a 160W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
Why buy it
- ✅+224.3% higher Geekbench multi-core.
- ✅+1180% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 20 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 64 cores / 128 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (11,408 vs 37,000).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 256 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7C13, which brings 64 cores / 128 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (1,538 vs 2,407).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 38.2 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($2,000 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌246.2% higher power demand at 225W 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 7C13?
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 7C13 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 171 FPS | 195 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 159 FPS |
| high | 132 FPS | 129 FPS |
| ultra | 112 FPS | 100 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 143 FPS | 160 FPS |
| medium | 123 FPS | 125 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 97 FPS |
| ultra | 84 FPS | 77 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 81 FPS | 72 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 60 FPS |
| high | 59 FPS | 47 FPS |
| ultra | 46 FPS | 39 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7C13 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 545 FPS | 267 FPS |
| medium | 464 FPS | 235 FPS |
| high | 389 FPS | 193 FPS |
| ultra | 356 FPS | 158 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 458 FPS | 219 FPS |
| medium | 403 FPS | 198 FPS |
| high | 345 FPS | 167 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 133 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 280 FPS | 135 FPS |
| medium | 247 FPS | 124 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 112 FPS |
| ultra | 204 FPS | 94 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7C13 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 837 FPS |
| medium | 449 FPS | 698 FPS |
| high | 415 FPS | 650 FPS |
| ultra | 375 FPS | 574 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 490 FPS | 602 FPS |
| medium | 422 FPS | 500 FPS |
| high | 382 FPS | 459 FPS |
| ultra | 343 FPS | 401 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 393 FPS | 430 FPS |
| medium | 331 FPS | 336 FPS |
| high | 296 FPS | 300 FPS |
| ultra | 246 FPS | 243 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7C13 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 977 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 886 FPS |
| high | 626 FPS | 761 FPS |
| ultra | 626 FPS | 659 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 753 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 657 FPS |
| high | 598 FPS | 560 FPS |
| ultra | 521 FPS | 481 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 535 FPS | 541 FPS |
| medium | 492 FPS | 481 FPS |
| high | 439 FPS | 422 FPS |
| ultra | 382 FPS | 364 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and EPYC 7C13

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 7C13
EPYC 7C13
The EPYC 7C13 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2021-03-01. It is based on the Milan (2021−2023) architecture. It features 64 cores and 128 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 3.68 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 225 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 76,363 points. Launch price was $5,000.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the EPYC 7C13 offers 64 cores / 128 threads — the EPYC 7C13 has 54 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 3.68 GHz on the EPYC 7C13 — a 22.2% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the EPYC 7C13 uses Milan (2021−2023) (7 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the EPYC 7C13's 76,363 — a 101.3% lead for the EPYC 7C13. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,407 vs 1,538, a 44.1% lead for the Core i5-13400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 11,408 vs 37,000 (105.7% advantage for the EPYC 7C13). L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 7C13.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7C13 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 10 / 16 | 64 / 128+540% |
| Boost Clock | 4.6 GHz+25% | 3.68 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz+25% | 2 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 20 MB (total) | 256 MB (total)+1180% |
| 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 | 76,363+205% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 16,211 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 2,407+57% | 1,538 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 11,408 | 37,000+224% |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-13400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the EPYC 7C13 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 DDR4-3200 on the EPYC 7C13 — the Core i5-13400F supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 7C13 supports up to 4096 GB of RAM compared to 192 GB — 182.1% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-13400F) vs 8 (EPYC 7C13). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 128 (EPYC 7C13) — the EPYC 7C13 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 7C13).
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7C13 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | SP3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200+25% | DDR4-3200 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 192 GB | 4096 GB+2033% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 8+300% |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | 128+540% |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F) vs AMD-V (EPYC 7C13). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming, EPYC 7C13 targets Enterprise Server. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600; EPYC 7C13 rivals Xeon Platinum 8380.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7C13 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | — | None |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | AMD-V |
| Target Use | Gaming | Enterprise Server |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the EPYC 7C13 debuted at $2000. On MSRP ($196 vs $2000), the Core i5-13400F is $1804 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 38.2 pts/$ for the EPYC 7C13 — making the Core i5-13400F the 107.9% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7C13 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $196-90% | $2000 |
| Performance per Dollar | 127.7+234% | 38.2 |
| Release Date | 2023 | 2021 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













