Core i5-13400F vs EPYC 9474F

CPU

GPU

Core i5-13400F

10 Cores16 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.6 GHz2023

Popular choices:

•••••••••

EPYC 9474F

48 Cores96 Thrd360 WWMax: 4.1 GHz2022

Popular choices:

••••i5-13400F•••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i5-13400F

10 / 16

25,029

0.0%

102,255

+308.5%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX

Ryzen Threadripper 7960X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

Ryzen Threadripper 7980X

Ryzen Threadripper 9980X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX

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

✅Costs $6,584 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $6,780 MSRP).
✅Delivers 746.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 15.1 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $6,780 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 360W, a 295W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 9474F.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9474F across 9 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (25,029 vs 102,255).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9474F, which brings 48 cores / 96 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

EPYC 9474F

2022

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +32.5% higher average FPS across 9 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 48 cores / 96 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 15.1 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($6,780 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌453.8% higher power demand at 360W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Core i5-13400F

2023

EPYC 9474F

2022

Why buy it

✅Costs $6,584 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $6,780 MSRP).
✅Delivers 746.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 15.1 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $6,780 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 360W, a 295W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 9474F.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +32.5% higher average FPS across 9 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 48 cores / 96 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 EPYC 9474F across 9 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (25,029 vs 102,255).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9474F, which brings 48 cores / 96 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.1 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($6,780 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌453.8% higher power demand at 360W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9474F better than Core i5-13400F?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 9474F 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 9474F is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 32.5% more average FPS across 9 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 9474F is the better fit. You are getting 308.5% better PassMark, backed by 48 cores and 96 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 9474F is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-13400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. EPYC 9474F is 3359.2% more expensive on MSRP at $6,780 MSRP versus $196 MSRP, and it gives you a 32.5% average FPS lead across 9 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-13400F is also 746.7% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 15.1 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

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

EPYC 9474F 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 and more multi-core headroom with 48 cores / 96 threads instead of 10/16. 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 9474F Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9474F
1080p
low	171 FPS	218 FPS
medium	158 FPS	179 FPS
high	132 FPS	154 FPS
ultra	112 FPS	108 FPS
1440p
low	143 FPS	189 FPS
medium	123 FPS	151 FPS
high	99 FPS	121 FPS
ultra	84 FPS	86 FPS
4K
low	81 FPS	77 FPS
medium	74 FPS	64 FPS
high	59 FPS	50 FPS
ultra	46 FPS	41 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 9474F

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9474F
1080p
low	545 FPS	615 FPS
medium	464 FPS	537 FPS
high	389 FPS	433 FPS
ultra	356 FPS	378 FPS
1440p
low	458 FPS	516 FPS
medium	403 FPS	459 FPS
high	345 FPS	381 FPS
ultra	301 FPS	316 FPS
4K
low	280 FPS	320 FPS
medium	247 FPS	288 FPS
high	231 FPS	258 FPS
ultra	204 FPS	232 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 9474F

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9474F
1080p
low	530 FPS	787 FPS
medium	449 FPS	671 FPS
high	415 FPS	608 FPS
ultra	375 FPS	534 FPS
1440p
low	490 FPS	586 FPS
medium	422 FPS	497 FPS
high	382 FPS	443 FPS
ultra	343 FPS	384 FPS
4K
low	393 FPS	423 FPS
medium	331 FPS	339 FPS
high	296 FPS	299 FPS
ultra	246 FPS	240 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 9474F

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9474F
1080p
low	626 FPS	1075 FPS
medium	626 FPS	974 FPS
high	626 FPS	829 FPS
ultra	626 FPS	732 FPS
1440p
low	626 FPS	819 FPS
medium	626 FPS	717 FPS
high	598 FPS	607 FPS
ultra	521 FPS	521 FPS
4K
low	535 FPS	592 FPS
medium	492 FPS	531 FPS
high	439 FPS	461 FPS
ultra	382 FPS	393 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 9474F

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and EPYC 9474F

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 9474F

The EPYC 9474F 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 48 cores and 96 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.1 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): 360 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 102,255 points. Launch price was $6,780.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the EPYC 9474F offers 48 cores / 96 threads — the EPYC 9474F has 38 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 4.1 GHz on the EPYC 9474F — a 11.5% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 3.6 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the EPYC 9474F uses Genoa (2022−2023) (5 nm, 6 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the EPYC 9474F's 102,255 — a 121.3% lead for the EPYC 9474F. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9474F.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9474F
Cores / Threads	10 / 16	48 / 96+380%
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz+12%	4.1 GHz
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	3.6 GHz+44%
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	102,255+309%
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 9474F uses SP5 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 memory speed. The Core i5-13400F supports up to 192 GB of RAM compared to 6 TB — 187.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-13400F) vs 12 (EPYC 9474F). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 128 (EPYC 9474F) — the EPYC 9474F 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 9474F).

Feature	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9474F
Socket	LGA1700	SP5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200	DDR5-4800
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB	6 TB+3100%
RAM Channels	2	12+500%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	128+540%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F) vs AMD-V, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9474F). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming, EPYC 9474F targets Data Center / Performance Optimized. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600; EPYC 9474F rivals Xeon 8461V.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9474F
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	AMD-V, SEV-SNP
Target Use	Gaming	Data Center / Performance Optimized

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the EPYC 9474F debuted at $6780. On MSRP ($196 vs $6780), the Core i5-13400F is $6584 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 15.1 pts/$ for the EPYC 9474F — making the Core i5-13400F the 157.7% better value option.