Core i5-13400F vs EPYC 9734

CPU

GPU

Core i5-13400F

10 Cores16 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.6 GHz2023

Popular choices:

•••••••••

EPYC 9734

112 Cores224 Thrd340 WWMax: 3 GHz2023

Popular choices:

••••i5-13400F•••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i5-13400F

10 / 16

25,029

0.0%

102,286

+308.7%

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

✅Better for gaming: +4.5% higher average FPS across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $9,404 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $9,600 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1098.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 10.7 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $9,600 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 340W, a 275W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 9734.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (25,029 vs 102,286).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 256 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9734, which brings 112 cores / 224 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

EPYC 9734

2023

Why buy it

✅+308.7% higher PassMark.
✅+1180% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 112 cores / 224 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 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.7 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($9,600 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌423.1% higher power demand at 340W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Core i5-13400F

2023

EPYC 9734

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.5% higher average FPS across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $9,404 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $9,600 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1098.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 10.7 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $9,600 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 340W, a 275W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 9734.

Why buy it

✅+308.7% higher PassMark.
✅+1180% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 112 cores / 224 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 102,286).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 256 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9734, which brings 112 cores / 224 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.7 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($9,600 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌423.1% higher power demand at 340W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-13400F better than EPYC 9734?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 9734 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 9734 is the better fit. You are getting 308.7% better PassMark, backed by 112 cores and 224 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?

Core i5-13400F is the smarter buy today. Core i5-13400F is $9,404 cheaper on MSRP at $196 MSRP versus $9,600 MSRP, and it gives you a 4.5% average FPS lead across 8 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that EPYC 9734 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 308.7% better PassMark. It is also 1098.5% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 10.7 PassMark/$), 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 9734 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting 1180% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 20 MB) and more multi-core headroom with 112 cores / 224 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 9734 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9734
1080p
low	171 FPS	163 FPS
medium	158 FPS	134 FPS
high	132 FPS	113 FPS
ultra	112 FPS	89 FPS
1440p
low	143 FPS	143 FPS
medium	123 FPS	114 FPS
high	99 FPS	90 FPS
ultra	84 FPS	72 FPS
4K
low	81 FPS	68 FPS
medium	74 FPS	58 FPS
high	59 FPS	45 FPS
ultra	46 FPS	37 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 9734

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9734
1080p
low	545 FPS	238 FPS
medium	464 FPS	211 FPS
high	389 FPS	174 FPS
ultra	356 FPS	138 FPS
1440p
low	458 FPS	195 FPS
medium	403 FPS	177 FPS
high	345 FPS	151 FPS
ultra	301 FPS	116 FPS
4K
low	280 FPS	121 FPS
medium	247 FPS	112 FPS
high	231 FPS	97 FPS
ultra	204 FPS	79 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 9734

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9734
1080p
low	530 FPS	650 FPS
medium	449 FPS	541 FPS
high	415 FPS	481 FPS
ultra	375 FPS	422 FPS
1440p
low	490 FPS	503 FPS
medium	422 FPS	418 FPS
high	382 FPS	365 FPS
ultra	343 FPS	318 FPS
4K
low	393 FPS	371 FPS
medium	331 FPS	289 FPS
high	296 FPS	246 FPS
ultra	246 FPS	199 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 9734

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9734
1080p
low	626 FPS	868 FPS
medium	626 FPS	785 FPS
high	626 FPS	672 FPS
ultra	626 FPS	582 FPS
1440p
low	626 FPS	692 FPS
medium	626 FPS	600 FPS
high	598 FPS	511 FPS
ultra	521 FPS	430 FPS
4K
low	535 FPS	493 FPS
medium	492 FPS	439 FPS
high	439 FPS	384 FPS
ultra	382 FPS	327 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC 9734

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and EPYC 9734

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 9734

The EPYC 9734 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 13 June 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Bergamo (2023) architecture. It features 112 cores and 224 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 340 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 102,286 points. Launch price was $9,600.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the EPYC 9734 offers 112 cores / 224 threads — the EPYC 9734 has 102 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 3 GHz on the EPYC 9734 — a 42.1% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2.2 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the EPYC 9734 uses Bergamo (2023) (5 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the EPYC 9734's 102,286 — a 121.4% lead for the EPYC 9734. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9734.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9734
Cores / Threads	10 / 16	112 / 224+1020%
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz+53%	3 GHz
Base Clock	2.5 GHz+14%	2.2 GHz
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-29%
Architecture	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)	Bergamo (2023)
PassMark	25,029	102,286+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 9734 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 9734). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 128 (EPYC 9734) — the EPYC 9734 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 9734).

Feature	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9734
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 9734). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming, EPYC 9734 targets Data Center / High Density. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600; EPYC 9734 rivals Xeon 6780E.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	EPYC 9734
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	AMD-V, SEV-SNP
Target Use	Gaming	Data Center / High Density

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the EPYC 9734 debuted at $9600. On MSRP ($196 vs $9600), the Core i5-13400F is $9404 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 10.7 pts/$ for the EPYC 9734 — making the Core i5-13400F the 169.2% better value option.