
Core i5-13400F
Popular choices:

EPYC 9184X
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 i5-13400F
2023Why buy it
- ✅Costs $4,732 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $4,928 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 1220.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 9.7 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $4,928 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 320W, a 255W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 9184X.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9184X across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (25,029 vs 47,665).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9184X, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
EPYC 9184X
2023Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +13.5% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 9.7 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($4,928 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌392.3% higher power demand at 320W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Core i5-13400F
2023EPYC 9184X
2023Why buy it
- ✅Costs $4,732 less on MSRP ($196 MSRP vs $4,928 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 1220.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 127.7 vs 9.7 PassMark/$ ($196 MSRP vs $4,928 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 320W, a 255W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 9184X.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +13.5% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9184X across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (25,029 vs 47,665).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9184X, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 9.7 vs 127.7 PassMark/$ ($4,928 MSRP vs $196 MSRP).
- ❌392.3% higher power demand at 320W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-13400F.
Quick Answers
So, is EPYC 9184X better than Core i5-13400F?
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 i5-13400F | EPYC 9184X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 171 FPS | 169 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 138 FPS |
| high | 132 FPS | 118 FPS |
| ultra | 112 FPS | 94 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 143 FPS | 149 FPS |
| medium | 123 FPS | 119 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 96 FPS |
| ultra | 84 FPS | 78 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 81 FPS | 70 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 59 FPS |
| high | 59 FPS | 47 FPS |
| ultra | 46 FPS | 39 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 9184X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 545 FPS | 576 FPS |
| medium | 464 FPS | 504 FPS |
| high | 389 FPS | 409 FPS |
| ultra | 356 FPS | 357 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 458 FPS | 484 FPS |
| medium | 403 FPS | 431 FPS |
| high | 345 FPS | 360 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 298 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 280 FPS | 300 FPS |
| medium | 247 FPS | 271 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 244 FPS |
| ultra | 204 FPS | 219 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 9184X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 746 FPS |
| medium | 449 FPS | 632 FPS |
| high | 415 FPS | 575 FPS |
| ultra | 375 FPS | 506 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 490 FPS | 557 FPS |
| medium | 422 FPS | 470 FPS |
| high | 382 FPS | 420 FPS |
| ultra | 343 FPS | 364 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 393 FPS | 402 FPS |
| medium | 331 FPS | 321 FPS |
| high | 296 FPS | 284 FPS |
| ultra | 246 FPS | 228 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 9184X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 958 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 867 FPS |
| high | 626 FPS | 738 FPS |
| ultra | 626 FPS | 653 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 754 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 657 FPS |
| high | 598 FPS | 556 FPS |
| ultra | 521 FPS | 481 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 535 FPS | 534 FPS |
| medium | 492 FPS | 477 FPS |
| high | 439 FPS | 420 FPS |
| ultra | 382 FPS | 359 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and EPYC 9184X

Core i5-13400F
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 9184X
EPYC 9184X
The EPYC 9184X 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 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.55 GHz, with boost up to 4.2 GHz. L3 cache: 768 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 320 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 47,665 points. Launch price was $4,928.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the EPYC 9184X offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the EPYC 9184X has 6 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 4.2 GHz on the EPYC 9184X — a 9.1% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 3.55 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the EPYC 9184X uses Genoa-X (2023) (5 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the EPYC 9184X's 47,665 — a 62.3% lead for the EPYC 9184X. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 768 MB (total) on the EPYC 9184X.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 9184X |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 10 / 16 | 16 / 32+60% |
| Boost Clock | 4.6 GHz+10% | 4.2 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz | 3.55 GHz+42% |
| L3 Cache | 20 MB (total) | 768 MB (total)+3740% |
| 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 | 47,665+90% |
| 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 9184X uses SP5 (PCIe 5.0) — 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 9184X — the EPYC 9184X supports 199.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9184X supports up to 6144 of RAM compared to 192 GB — 187.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-13400F) vs 12 (EPYC 9184X). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13400F) vs 128 (EPYC 9184X) — the EPYC 9184X 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 9184X).
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 9184X |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | SP5 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0 | PCIe 5.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 | 4800+95900% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 192 GB+3276700% | 6144 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 12+500% |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | 128+540% |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the EPYC 9184X 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 9184X). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600; EPYC 9184X rivals Xeon Platinum 8468X.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 9184X |
|---|---|---|
| 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 9184X debuted at $4928. On MSRP ($196 vs $4928), the Core i5-13400F is $4732 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13400F delivers 127.7 pts/$ vs 9.7 pts/$ for the EPYC 9184X — making the Core i5-13400F the 171.8% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 9184X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $196-96% | $4928 |
| Performance per Dollar | 127.7+1216% | 9.7 |
| Release Date | 2023 | 2023 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













