Core i5-13400F vs EPYC Embedded 8224P

CPU

GPU

Core i5-13400F

10 Cores16 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.6 GHz2023

Popular choices:

•••••••••

EPYC Embedded 8224P

24 Cores48 Thrd160 WWMax: 3 GHz2023

Popular choices:

••••i5-13400F•••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i5-13400F

10 / 16

25,029

0.0%

48,869

+95.2%

Ryzen Threadripper 3970X

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX

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 $659 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $855 MSRP).
✅Delivers 123.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 57.2 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $855 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 160W, a 95W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC Embedded 8224P.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC Embedded 8224P across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (25,029 vs 48,869).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC Embedded 8224P, which brings 24 cores / 48 threads and 96 PCIe lanes.

EPYC Embedded 8224P

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +14.0% higher average FPS across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+220% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 24 cores / 48 threads, plus 96 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅380% more PCIe lanes (96 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 57.2 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($855 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌146.2% higher power demand at 160W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Core i5-13400F

2023

EPYC Embedded 8224P

2023

Why buy it

✅Costs $659 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $855 MSRP).
✅Delivers 123.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 57.2 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $855 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 160W, a 95W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC Embedded 8224P.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +14.0% higher average FPS across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+220% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 24 cores / 48 threads, plus 96 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅380% more PCIe lanes (96 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC Embedded 8224P across 8 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (25,029 vs 48,869).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC Embedded 8224P, which brings 24 cores / 48 threads and 96 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 57.2 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($855 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
❌146.2% higher power demand at 160W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC Embedded 8224P better than Core i5-13400F?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC Embedded 8224P 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 Embedded 8224P is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 14.0% more average FPS across 8 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC Embedded 8224P is the better fit. You are getting 95.2% better PassMark, backed by 24 cores and 48 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 220% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 20 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

EPYC Embedded 8224P is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-13400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. EPYC Embedded 8224P is 336.2% more expensive on MSRP at $855 MSRP versus $196 MSRP, and it gives you a 14.0% average FPS lead across 8 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-13400F is also 123.4% better value on MSRP (127.7 vs 57.2 PassMark/$), 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 Embedded 8224P is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting 220% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 20 MB), more multi-core headroom with 24 cores / 48 threads instead of 10/16, and AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. That extra compute headroom should age better as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

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 Embedded 8224P Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC Embedded 8224P
1080p
low	171 FPS	157 FPS
medium	158 FPS	129 FPS
high	132 FPS	108 FPS
ultra	112 FPS	86 FPS
1440p
low	143 FPS	140 FPS
medium	123 FPS	112 FPS
high	99 FPS	88 FPS
ultra	84 FPS	71 FPS
4K
low	81 FPS	67 FPS
medium	74 FPS	57 FPS
high	59 FPS	44 FPS
ultra	46 FPS	36 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC Embedded 8224P

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC Embedded 8224P
1080p
low	545 FPS	392 FPS
medium	464 FPS	348 FPS
high	389 FPS	284 FPS
ultra	356 FPS	227 FPS
1440p
low	458 FPS	330 FPS
medium	403 FPS	299 FPS
high	345 FPS	252 FPS
ultra	301 FPS	193 FPS
4K
low	280 FPS	204 FPS
medium	247 FPS	187 FPS
high	231 FPS	159 FPS
ultra	204 FPS	128 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC Embedded 8224P

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC Embedded 8224P
1080p
low	530 FPS	858 FPS
medium	449 FPS	771 FPS
high	415 FPS	745 FPS
ultra	375 FPS	668 FPS
1440p
low	490 FPS	662 FPS
medium	422 FPS	576 FPS
high	382 FPS	548 FPS
ultra	343 FPS	487 FPS
4K
low	393 FPS	434 FPS
medium	331 FPS	343 FPS
high	296 FPS	306 FPS
ultra	246 FPS	250 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC Embedded 8224P

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-13400F	EPYC Embedded 8224P
1080p
low	626 FPS	1018 FPS
medium	626 FPS	908 FPS
high	626 FPS	770 FPS
ultra	626 FPS	647 FPS
1440p
low	626 FPS	824 FPS
medium	626 FPS	708 FPS
high	598 FPS	597 FPS
ultra	521 FPS	488 FPS
4K
low	535 FPS	597 FPS
medium	492 FPS	521 FPS
high	439 FPS	449 FPS
ultra	382 FPS	372 FPS

Open Core i5-13400F Open EPYC Embedded 8224P

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and EPYC Embedded 8224P

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 Embedded 8224P

The EPYC Embedded 8224P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Siena (2023−2024) architecture. It features 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 2.55 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: SP6. Thermal design power (TDP): 160 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 48,869 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the EPYC Embedded 8224P offers 24 cores / 48 threads — the EPYC Embedded 8224P has 14 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 3 GHz on the EPYC Embedded 8224P — a 42.1% 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 Embedded 8224P uses Siena (2023−2024) (5 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the EPYC Embedded 8224P's 48,869 — a 64.5% lead for the EPYC Embedded 8224P. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 64 MB (total) on the EPYC Embedded 8224P.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	EPYC Embedded 8224P
Cores / Threads	10 / 16	24 / 48+140%
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz+53%	3 GHz
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	2.55 GHz+2%
L3 Cache	20 MB (total)	64 MB (total)+220%
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)	Siena (2023−2024)
PassMark	25,029	48,869+95%
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 Embedded 8224P uses SP6 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-13400F versus 4800 on the EPYC Embedded 8224P — the EPYC Embedded 8224P supports 199.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC Embedded 8224P supports up to 1152 of RAM compared to 192 GB — 142.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-13400F) vs 6 (EPYC Embedded 8224P). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 96 (EPYC Embedded 8224P) — the EPYC Embedded 8224P offers 76 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-13400F) and SP6 (EPYC Embedded 8224P).

Feature	Core i5-13400F	EPYC Embedded 8224P
Socket	LGA1700	SP6
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200	4800+95900%
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB+17476167%	1152
RAM Channels	2	6+200%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	96+380%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the EPYC Embedded 8224P supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F) vs VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V (EPYC Embedded 8224P). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600; EPYC Embedded 8224P rivals Xeon Platinum 8452Y.

Feature	Core i5-13400F	EPYC Embedded 8224P
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	—	None
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V
Target Use	Gaming	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-13400F launched at $196 MSRP, while the EPYC Embedded 8224P debuted at $855. On MSRP ($196 vs $855), the Core i5-13400F is $659 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 57.2 pts/$ for the EPYC Embedded 8224P — making the Core i5-13400F the 76.3% better value option.