Core i5-13400F vs EPYC 9684X

CPU

GPU

Core i5-13400F

10 Cores16 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.6 GHz2023

Popular choices:

•••••••••

EPYC 9684X

96 Cores192 Thrd400 WWMax: 3.7 GHz2023

Popular choices:

••••i5-13400F•••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i5-13400F

10 / 16

25,029

0.0%

122,017

+387.5%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX

Ryzen Threadripper 9970X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

Ryzen Threadripper 7980X

Ryzen Threadripper 9980X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX

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 $14,560 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $14,756 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1444.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 8.3 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $14,756 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 400W, a 335W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 9684X.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (25,029 vs 122,017).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 1.1 GB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9684X, which brings 96 cores / 192 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

EPYC 9684X

2023

Why buy it

✅+387.5% higher PassMark.
✅+5660% larger total L3 cache (1.1 GB vs 20 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 96 cores / 192 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 8.3 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($14,756 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌515.4% higher power demand at 400W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Core i5-13400F

2023

EPYC 9684X

2023

Why buy it

✅Costs $14,560 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $14,756 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1444.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 8.3 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $14,756 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 400W, a 335W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 9684X.

Why buy it

✅+387.5% higher PassMark.
✅+5660% larger total L3 cache (1.1 GB vs 20 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 96 cores / 192 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 122,017).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 1.1 GB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9684X, which brings 96 cores / 192 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 8.3 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($14,756 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌515.4% higher power demand at 400W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-13400F better than EPYC 9684X?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 9684X 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 9684X is the better fit. You are getting 387.5% better PassMark, backed by 96 cores and 192 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 5660% larger total L3 cache (1.1 GB 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 $14,560 cheaper on MSRP at $196 MSRP versus $14,756 MSRP, and it gives you a 1.3% average FPS lead across 49 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that EPYC 9684X is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 387.5% better PassMark. It is also 1444.3% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 8.3 PassMark/$), 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 9684X is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting 5660% larger total L3 cache (1.1 GB vs 20 MB) and more multi-core headroom with 96 cores / 192 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 9684X Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9684X
1080p
low	171 FPS	169 FPS
medium	158 FPS	140 FPS
high	132 FPS	120 FPS
ultra	112 FPS	94 FPS
1440p
low	143 FPS	147 FPS
medium	123 FPS	119 FPS
high	99 FPS	95 FPS
ultra	84 FPS	76 FPS
4K
low	81 FPS	69 FPS
medium	74 FPS	59 FPS
high	59 FPS	46 FPS
ultra	46 FPS	38 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 9684X

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9684X
1080p
low	545 FPS	506 FPS
medium	464 FPS	442 FPS
high	389 FPS	353 FPS
ultra	356 FPS	287 FPS
1440p
low	458 FPS	416 FPS
medium	403 FPS	372 FPS
high	345 FPS	306 FPS
ultra	301 FPS	242 FPS
4K
low	280 FPS	256 FPS
medium	247 FPS	233 FPS
high	231 FPS	204 FPS
ultra	204 FPS	170 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 9684X

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9684X
1080p
low	530 FPS	668 FPS
medium	449 FPS	558 FPS
high	415 FPS	519 FPS
ultra	375 FPS	452 FPS
1440p
low	490 FPS	509 FPS
medium	422 FPS	423 FPS
high	382 FPS	388 FPS
ultra	343 FPS	335 FPS
4K
low	393 FPS	374 FPS
medium	331 FPS	292 FPS
high	296 FPS	261 FPS
ultra	246 FPS	209 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 9684X

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9684X
1080p
low	626 FPS	902 FPS
medium	626 FPS	822 FPS
high	626 FPS	708 FPS
ultra	626 FPS	623 FPS
1440p
low	626 FPS	721 FPS
medium	626 FPS	628 FPS
high	598 FPS	538 FPS
ultra	521 FPS	459 FPS
4K
low	535 FPS	517 FPS
medium	492 FPS	462 FPS
high	439 FPS	405 FPS
ultra	382 FPS	348 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 9684X

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and EPYC 9684X

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 9684X

The EPYC 9684X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 13 June 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Genoa-X (2023) architecture. It features 96 cores and 192 threads. Base frequency is 2.55 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 1152 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 400 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 122,017 points. Launch price was $14,756.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the EPYC 9684X offers 96 cores / 192 threads — the EPYC 9684X has 86 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 3.7 GHz on the EPYC 9684X — a 21.7% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2.55 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the EPYC 9684X uses Genoa-X (2023) (5 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the EPYC 9684X's 122,017 — a 131.9% lead for the EPYC 9684X. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 1152 MB (total) on the EPYC 9684X.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9684X
Cores / Threads	10 / 16	96 / 192+860%
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz+24%	3.7 GHz
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	2.55 GHz+2%
L3 Cache	20 MB (total)	1152 MB (total)+5660%
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)+25%	1 MB (per core)
Process	Intel 7 nm	5 nm-29%
Architecture	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)	Genoa-X (2023)
PassMark	25,029	122,017+388%
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 9684X 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 9684X). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 128 (EPYC 9684X) — the EPYC 9684X 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 9684X).

Feature	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9684X
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 9684X). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming, EPYC 9684X targets HPC / Cache Sensitive Workloads. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600; EPYC 9684X rivals Xeon 6979P.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9684X
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	AMD-V, SEV-SNP
Target Use	Gaming	HPC / Cache Sensitive Workloads

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the EPYC 9684X debuted at $14756. On MSRP ($196 vs $14756), the Core i5-13400F is $14560 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 8.3 pts/$ for the EPYC 9684X — making the Core i5-13400F the 175.7% better value option.