Core i5-13400F
EPYC 9754
Core i5-13400F vs EPYC 9754 Performance Spectrum
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.
Core i5-13400F vs EPYC 9754 FPS Benchmarks
Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.
Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Among Us
Apex Legends
ARC Raiders
Baldur's Gate 3
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
Core i5-13400F vs EPYC 9754: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
Core i5-13400F
2023Why buy it
- ✅+47.3% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
- ✅Costs $11,704 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $11,900 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 1443.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 8.3 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $11,900 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 360W, a 295W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 9754.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (16,211 vs 104,584).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 256 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9754, which brings 128 cores / 256 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
EPYC 9754
2023Why buy it
- ✅+545.1% higher Cinebench R23 multi-core.
- ✅+1180% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 20 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 128 cores / 256 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (1,634 vs 2,407).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 8.3 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($11,900 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 Core i5-13400F better than EPYC 9754?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Core i5-13400F vs EPYC 9754 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.
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 9754
The EPYC 9754 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 13 June 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Bergamo (2023) architecture. It features 128 cores and 256 threads. Base frequency is 2.25 GHz, with boost up to 3.1 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 360 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 98,450 points. Launch price was $11,900.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the EPYC 9754 offers 128 cores / 256 threads — the EPYC 9754 has 118 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 3.1 GHz on the EPYC 9754 — a 39% 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 9754 uses Bergamo (2023) (5 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the EPYC 9754's 98,450 — a 118.9% lead for the EPYC 9754. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 16,211 vs 104,584 (146.3% advantage for the EPYC 9754). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,407 vs 1,634, a 38.3% lead for the Core i5-13400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 11,408 vs 16,825 (38.4% advantage for the EPYC 9754). L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9754.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 9754 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 10 / 16 | 128 / 256+1180% |
| Boost Clock | 4.6 GHz+48% | 3.1 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz+11% | 2.25 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 | 98,450+293% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 16,211 | 104,584+545% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 2,407+47% | 1,634 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 11,408 | 16,825+47% |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-13400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the EPYC 9754 uses SP5 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 memory speed. The EPYC 9754 supports up to 6 TB of RAM compared to 192 GB — 3100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-13400F) vs 12 (EPYC 9754). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 128 (EPYC 9754) — the EPYC 9754 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 9754).
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 9754 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 9754). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming, EPYC 9754 targets Data Center / Cloud Native. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600; EPYC 9754 rivals Xeon 6780E.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 9754 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | AMD-V, SEV-SNP |
| Target Use | Gaming | Data Center / Cloud Native |
Value Analysis
At launch, the Core i5-13400F was priced at $196, while the EPYC 9754 came in at $11900. On launch pricing ($196 vs $11900), Core i5-13400F was $11704 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 8.3 pts/$ for the EPYC 9754 — making the Core i5-13400F the 175.7% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 9754 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $196-98% | $11900 |
| Performance per Dollar | 127.7+1439% | 8.3 |
| Release Date | 2023 | 2023 |
Affiliate Disclosure
ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.
Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Core i5-13400F and EPYC 9754
