
Core i5-10400F
Popular choices:

EPYC 7763
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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 i5-10400F
2020Why buy it
- ✅Costs $7,730 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $7,890 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 660.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 10.7 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $7,890 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 280W, a 215W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 7763.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 7763 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 84,440).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7763, which brings 64 cores / 128 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
EPYC 7763
2021Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +55.0% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 64 cores / 128 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅700% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.7 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($7,890 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ❌330.8% higher power demand at 280W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Core i5-10400F
2020EPYC 7763
2021Why buy it
- ✅Costs $7,730 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $7,890 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 660.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 10.7 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $7,890 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 280W, a 215W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 7763.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +55.0% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 64 cores / 128 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅700% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 7763 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 84,440).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7763, which brings 64 cores / 128 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.7 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($7,890 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
- ❌330.8% higher power demand at 280W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.
Quick Answers
So, is EPYC 7763 better than Core i5-10400F?
Which one is better for gaming?
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?
Games Benchmarks
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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | EPYC 7763 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 192 FPS | 190 FPS |
| medium | 152 FPS | 155 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 123 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 96 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 156 FPS |
| medium | 119 FPS | 123 FPS |
| high | 97 FPS | 94 FPS |
| ultra | 79 FPS | 75 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 72 FPS |
| medium | 70 FPS | 60 FPS |
| high | 55 FPS | 46 FPS |
| ultra | 43 FPS | 38 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | EPYC 7763 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 418 FPS |
| medium | 318 FPS | 367 FPS |
| high | 290 FPS | 299 FPS |
| ultra | 253 FPS | 234 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 344 FPS |
| medium | 292 FPS | 310 FPS |
| high | 267 FPS | 259 FPS |
| ultra | 234 FPS | 197 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 309 FPS | 211 FPS |
| medium | 258 FPS | 194 FPS |
| high | 235 FPS | 163 FPS |
| ultra | 199 FPS | 131 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | EPYC 7763 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 836 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 696 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 649 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 573 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 602 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 500 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 458 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 400 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 430 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 335 FPS |
| high | 289 FPS | 300 FPS |
| ultra | 229 FPS | 242 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-10400F | EPYC 7763 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 975 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 885 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 761 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 655 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 745 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 648 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 554 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 476 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 326 FPS | 531 FPS |
| medium | 326 FPS | 473 FPS |
| high | 326 FPS | 414 FPS |
| ultra | 326 FPS | 360 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and EPYC 7763

Core i5-10400F
Core i5-10400F
The Core i5-10400F is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 April 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 2.9 GHz, with boost up to 4.3 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1200. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 13,029 points. Launch price was $155.

EPYC 7763
EPYC 7763
The EPYC 7763 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 15 March 2021 (4 years ago). It is based on the Milan (2021−2023) architecture. It features 64 cores and 128 threads. Base frequency is 2.45 GHz, with boost up to 3.5 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm+ process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 280 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 84,440 points. Launch price was $7,890.
Processing Power
The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the EPYC 7763 offers 64 cores / 128 threads — the EPYC 7763 has 58 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 3.5 GHz on the EPYC 7763 — a 20.5% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.9 GHz vs 2.45 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the EPYC 7763 uses Milan (2021−2023) (7 nm+). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the EPYC 7763's 84,440 — a 146.5% lead for the EPYC 7763. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 7763.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | EPYC 7763 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 64 / 128+967% |
| Boost Clock | 4.3 GHz+23% | 3.5 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.9 GHz+18% | 2.45 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 12 MB (total) | 256 MB (total)+2033% |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 512 kB (per core)+100% |
| Process | 14 nm | 7 nm+-50% |
| Architecture | Comet Lake (2020−2025) | Milan (2021−2023) |
| PassMark | 13,029 | 84,440+548% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 8,191 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,454 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 5,783 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the EPYC 7763 uses SP3 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus 3200 on the EPYC 7763 — the EPYC 7763 supports 199.5% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 7763 supports up to 4096 of RAM compared to 128 GB — 187.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-10400F) vs 8 (EPYC 7763). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 128 (EPYC 7763) — the EPYC 7763 offers 112 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and SP3 (EPYC 7763).
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | EPYC 7763 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1200 | SP3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 4.0+33% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666 | 3200+79900% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB+3276700% | 4096 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 8+300% |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 128+700% |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) vs VT-x, VT-d, SEV (EPYC 7763). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; EPYC 7763 rivals Xeon Platinum 8380.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | EPYC 7763 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | — | None |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d, SEV |
| Target Use | Gaming | — |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the EPYC 7763 debuted at $7890. On MSRP ($160 vs $7890), the Core i5-10400F is $7730 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 10.7 pts/$ for the EPYC 7763 — making the Core i5-10400F the 153.5% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-10400F | EPYC 7763 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $160-98% | $7890 |
| Performance per Dollar | 81.4+661% | 10.7 |
| Release Date | 2020 | 2021 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












