Core i5-13400F vs EPYC 9634

CPU

GPU

Core i5-13400F

10 Cores16 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.6 GHz2023

Popular choices:

•••••••••

EPYC 9634

84 Cores168 Thrd290 WWMax: 3.7 GHz2022

Popular choices:

••••i5-13400F•••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i5-13400F

10 / 16

25,029

0.0%

107,944

+331.3%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen 9 9950X3D

Ryzen Threadripper 7960X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX

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

✅Better for gaming: +9.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $10,108 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $10,304 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1119.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 10.5 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $10,304 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 290W, a 225W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 9634.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (11,408 vs 85,000).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 384 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9634, which brings 84 cores / 168 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

EPYC 9634

2022

Why buy it

✅+645.1% higher Geekbench multi-core.
✅+1820% larger total L3 cache (384 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 84 cores / 168 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 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.5 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($10,304 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌346.2% higher power demand at 290W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Core i5-13400F

2023

EPYC 9634

2022

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +9.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $10,108 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $10,304 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1119.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 10.5 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $10,304 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 290W, a 225W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 9634.

Why buy it

✅+645.1% higher Geekbench multi-core.
✅+1820% larger total L3 cache (384 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 84 cores / 168 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 85,000).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 384 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9634, which brings 84 cores / 168 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.5 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($10,304 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌346.2% higher power demand at 290W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-13400F better than EPYC 9634?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 9634 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 9634 is the better fit. You are getting 645.1% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 84 cores and 168 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 1820% larger total L3 cache (384 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 $10,108 cheaper on MSRP at $196 MSRP versus $10,304 MSRP, and it gives you a 9.9% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that EPYC 9634 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 645.1% better Geekbench multi-core. It is also 1119.0% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 10.5 PassMark/$), 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 2022). That makes it the safer long-term pick.

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 9634 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9634
1080p
low	171 FPS	170 FPS
medium	158 FPS	141 FPS
high	132 FPS	122 FPS
ultra	112 FPS	96 FPS
1440p
low	143 FPS	148 FPS
medium	123 FPS	119 FPS
high	99 FPS	97 FPS
ultra	84 FPS	77 FPS
4K
low	81 FPS	70 FPS
medium	74 FPS	59 FPS
high	59 FPS	47 FPS
ultra	46 FPS	39 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 9634

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9634
1080p
low	545 FPS	280 FPS
medium	464 FPS	246 FPS
high	389 FPS	202 FPS
ultra	356 FPS	166 FPS
1440p
low	458 FPS	230 FPS
medium	403 FPS	207 FPS
high	345 FPS	175 FPS
ultra	301 FPS	139 FPS
4K
low	280 FPS	142 FPS
medium	247 FPS	130 FPS
high	231 FPS	117 FPS
ultra	204 FPS	98 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 9634

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9634
1080p
low	530 FPS	671 FPS
medium	449 FPS	560 FPS
high	415 FPS	522 FPS
ultra	375 FPS	454 FPS
1440p
low	490 FPS	511 FPS
medium	422 FPS	425 FPS
high	382 FPS	389 FPS
ultra	343 FPS	337 FPS
4K
low	393 FPS	376 FPS
medium	331 FPS	293 FPS
high	296 FPS	262 FPS
ultra	246 FPS	210 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 9634

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9634
1080p
low	626 FPS	899 FPS
medium	626 FPS	819 FPS
high	626 FPS	706 FPS
ultra	626 FPS	621 FPS
1440p
low	626 FPS	722 FPS
medium	626 FPS	629 FPS
high	598 FPS	538 FPS
ultra	521 FPS	459 FPS
4K
low	535 FPS	518 FPS
medium	492 FPS	462 FPS
high	439 FPS	406 FPS
ultra	382 FPS	349 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 9634

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and EPYC 9634

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 9634

The EPYC 9634 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 84 cores and 168 threads. Base frequency is 2.25 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 384 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm, 6 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 290 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 107,944 points. Launch price was $10,304.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the EPYC 9634 offers 84 cores / 168 threads — the EPYC 9634 has 74 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 3.7 GHz on the EPYC 9634 — a 21.7% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2.25 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the EPYC 9634 uses Genoa (2022−2023) (5 nm, 6 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the EPYC 9634's 107,944 — a 124.7% lead for the EPYC 9634. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,407 vs 1,800, a 28.9% lead for the Core i5-13400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 11,408 vs 85,000 (152.7% advantage for the EPYC 9634). L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 384 MB (total) on the EPYC 9634.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9634
Cores / Threads	10 / 16	84 / 168+740%
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz+24%	3.7 GHz
Base Clock	2.5 GHz+11%	2.25 GHz
L3 Cache	20 MB (total)	384 MB (total)+1820%
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	107,944+331%
Cinebench R23 Multi	16,211	—
Geekbench 6 Single	2,407+34%	1,800
Geekbench 6 Multi	11,408	85,000+645%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-13400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the EPYC 9634 uses SP5 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 memory speed. The EPYC 9634 supports up to 6144 GB of RAM compared to 192 GB — 187.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-13400F) vs 12 (EPYC 9634). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 128 (EPYC 9634) — the EPYC 9634 offers 108 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-13400F) and SoC (EPYC 9634).

Feature	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9634
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	6144 GB+3100%
RAM Channels	2	12+500%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	128+540%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the EPYC 9634 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F) vs AMD-V (EPYC 9634). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming, EPYC 9634 targets Server/Datacenter. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600; EPYC 9634 rivals Xeon 8470.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9634
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	AMD-V
Target Use	Gaming	Server/Datacenter

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the EPYC 9634 debuted at $10304. On MSRP ($196 vs $10304), the Core i5-13400F is $10108 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 10.5 pts/$ for the EPYC 9634 — making the Core i5-13400F the 169.7% better value option.