Core i5-13400F vs EPYC 9174F

CPU

GPU

Core i5-13400F

10 Cores16 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.6 GHz2023

Popular choices:

•••••••••

EPYC 9174F

16 Cores32 Thrd320 WWMax: 4.4 GHz2022

Popular choices:

••••i5-13400F•••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i5-13400F

10 / 16

25,029

0.0%

52,249

+108.8%

Ryzen 9 7940H

Ryzen 7 PRO 7745

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX

Ryzen 9 5950X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX

Ryzen Threadripper 9970X

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

✅Draws 65W instead of 320W, a 255W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 9174F.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9174F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (25,029 vs 52,249).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9174F, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 127.7 vs 269.3 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $194 MSRP).

EPYC 9174F

2022

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +40.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅Costs $2 less on MSRP ($194 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
✅Delivers 110.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 269.3 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($194 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌392.3% higher power demand at 320W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Core i5-13400F

2023

EPYC 9174F

2022

Why buy it

✅Draws 65W instead of 320W, a 255W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 9174F.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +40.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅Costs $2 less on MSRP ($194 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
✅Delivers 110.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 269.3 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($194 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9174F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (25,029 vs 52,249).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9174F, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 127.7 vs 269.3 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $194 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌392.3% higher power demand at 320W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9174F better than Core i5-13400F?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 9174F 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 9174F is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 40.8% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests. It also has a big cache advantage at 256 MB vs 20 MB.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9174F is the better fit. You are getting 108.8% better PassMark, backed by 16 cores and 32 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 1180% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 20 MB).

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

EPYC 9174F is the smarter buy today. EPYC 9174F is $2 cheaper on MSRP at $194 MSRP versus $196 MSRP, and it gives you a 40.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 110.9% better value on MSRP (269.3 vs 127.7 PassMark/$), 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?

EPYC 9174F is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting 3D V-Cache and a much larger 256 MB L3 cache instead of 20 MB, more multi-core headroom with 16 cores / 32 threads instead of 10/16, and AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. That extra cache should hold up really well in CPU-limited games and high-refresh builds.

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 9174F Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9174F
1080p
low	171 FPS	212 FPS
medium	158 FPS	174 FPS
high	132 FPS	149 FPS
ultra	112 FPS	108 FPS
1440p
low	143 FPS	189 FPS
medium	123 FPS	151 FPS
high	99 FPS	125 FPS
ultra	84 FPS	93 FPS
4K
low	81 FPS	91 FPS
medium	74 FPS	78 FPS
high	59 FPS	61 FPS
ultra	46 FPS	50 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 9174F

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9174F
1080p
low	545 FPS	713 FPS
medium	464 FPS	612 FPS
high	389 FPS	493 FPS
ultra	356 FPS	428 FPS
1440p
low	458 FPS	595 FPS
medium	403 FPS	522 FPS
high	345 FPS	434 FPS
ultra	301 FPS	354 FPS
4K
low	280 FPS	361 FPS
medium	247 FPS	319 FPS
high	231 FPS	288 FPS
ultra	204 FPS	254 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 9174F

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9174F
1080p
low	530 FPS	814 FPS
medium	449 FPS	686 FPS
high	415 FPS	637 FPS
ultra	375 FPS	557 FPS
1440p
low	490 FPS	614 FPS
medium	422 FPS	515 FPS
high	382 FPS	471 FPS
ultra	343 FPS	404 FPS
4K
low	393 FPS	440 FPS
medium	331 FPS	352 FPS
high	296 FPS	311 FPS
ultra	246 FPS	246 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 9174F

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9174F
1080p
low	626 FPS	1164 FPS
medium	626 FPS	1015 FPS
high	626 FPS	889 FPS
ultra	626 FPS	801 FPS
1440p
low	626 FPS	901 FPS
medium	626 FPS	788 FPS
high	598 FPS	666 FPS
ultra	521 FPS	583 FPS
4K
low	535 FPS	640 FPS
medium	492 FPS	571 FPS
high	439 FPS	494 FPS
ultra	382 FPS	431 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 9174F

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and EPYC 9174F

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 9174F

The EPYC 9174F is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 November 2022 (3 years ago). It is based on the Genoa (2022−2023) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 4.1 GHz, with boost up to 4.4 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm, 6 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 320 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 52,249 points. Launch price was $3,850.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the EPYC 9174F offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the EPYC 9174F has 6 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 4.4 GHz on the EPYC 9174F — a 4.4% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 4.1 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the EPYC 9174F uses Genoa (2022−2023) (5 nm, 6 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the EPYC 9174F's 52,249 — a 70.4% lead for the EPYC 9174F. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9174F.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9174F
Cores / Threads	10 / 16	16 / 32+60%
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz+5%	4.4 GHz
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	4.1 GHz+64%
L3 Cache	20 MB (total)	256 MB (total)+1180%
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)+25%	1 MB (per core)
Process	Intel 7 nm	5 nm, 6 nm-29%
Architecture	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)	Genoa (2022−2023)
PassMark	25,029	52,249+109%
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 9174F uses SP5 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-13400F versus 4800 on the EPYC 9174F — the EPYC 9174F supports 199.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9174F supports up to 6144 of RAM compared to 192 GB — 187.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-13400F) vs 12 (EPYC 9174F). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 128 (EPYC 9174F) — the EPYC 9174F offers 108 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-13400F) and SP5 (EPYC 9174F).

Feature	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9174F
Socket	LGA1700	SP5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200	4800+95900%
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB+3276700%	6144
RAM Channels	2	12+500%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	128+540%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the EPYC 9174F 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 9174F rivals Xeon Platinum 8468.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9174F
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 9174F debuted at $194. On MSRP ($196 vs $194), the EPYC 9174F is $2 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 269.3 pts/$ for the EPYC 9174F — making the EPYC 9174F the 71.3% better value option.