
Core i5-13400F
Popular choices:

EPYC 7232P
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
- ✅Better for gaming: +21.7% higher average FPS across 48 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+25% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 16 MB).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 120W, a 55W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $196 MSRP, while EPYC 7232P mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
EPYC 7232P
2019Why buy it
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 48 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (17,712 vs 25,029).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (16 MB vs 20 MB).
- ❌84.6% higher power demand at 120W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
Core i5-13400F
2023EPYC 7232P
2019Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +21.7% higher average FPS across 48 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+25% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 16 MB).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 120W, a 55W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Why buy it
Trade-offs
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $196 MSRP, while EPYC 7232P mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13400F across 48 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (17,712 vs 25,029).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (16 MB vs 20 MB).
- ❌84.6% higher power demand at 120W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while Core i5-13400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i5-13400F better than EPYC 7232P?
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 7232P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 171 FPS | 146 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 119 FPS |
| high | 132 FPS | 101 FPS |
| ultra | 112 FPS | 82 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 143 FPS | 129 FPS |
| medium | 123 FPS | 103 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 84 FPS |
| ultra | 84 FPS | 67 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 81 FPS | 62 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 53 FPS |
| high | 59 FPS | 42 FPS |
| ultra | 46 FPS | 33 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7232P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 545 FPS | 264 FPS |
| medium | 464 FPS | 229 FPS |
| high | 389 FPS | 201 FPS |
| ultra | 356 FPS | 159 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 458 FPS | 228 FPS |
| medium | 403 FPS | 205 FPS |
| high | 345 FPS | 182 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 143 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 280 FPS | 164 FPS |
| medium | 247 FPS | 152 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 131 FPS |
| ultra | 204 FPS | 102 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7232P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 443 FPS |
| medium | 449 FPS | 443 FPS |
| high | 415 FPS | 437 FPS |
| ultra | 375 FPS | 384 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 490 FPS | 443 FPS |
| medium | 422 FPS | 385 FPS |
| high | 382 FPS | 335 FPS |
| ultra | 343 FPS | 290 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 393 FPS | 348 FPS |
| medium | 331 FPS | 271 FPS |
| high | 296 FPS | 230 FPS |
| ultra | 246 FPS | 185 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7232P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 443 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 443 FPS |
| high | 626 FPS | 443 FPS |
| ultra | 626 FPS | 443 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 626 FPS | 443 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 443 FPS |
| high | 598 FPS | 443 FPS |
| ultra | 521 FPS | 404 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 535 FPS | 426 FPS |
| medium | 492 FPS | 386 FPS |
| high | 439 FPS | 345 FPS |
| ultra | 382 FPS | 298 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13400F and EPYC 7232P

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 7232P
EPYC 7232P
The EPYC 7232P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 7 August 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Zen 2 (2017−2020) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm, 14 nm process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 120 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Eight-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 17,712 points. Launch price was $450.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13400F packs 10 cores / 16 threads, while the EPYC 7232P offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Core i5-13400F has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i5-13400F versus 3.2 GHz on the EPYC 7232P — a 35.9% clock advantage for the Core i5-13400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 3.1 GHz). The Core i5-13400F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the EPYC 7232P uses Zen 2 (2017−2020) (7 nm, 14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13400F scores 25,029 against the EPYC 7232P's 17,712 — a 34.2% lead for the Core i5-13400F. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i5-13400F vs 16 MB (total) on the EPYC 7232P.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7232P |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 10 / 16+25% | 8 / 16 |
| Boost Clock | 4.6 GHz+44% | 3.2 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz | 3.1 GHz+24% |
| L3 Cache | 20 MB (total)+25% | 16 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core)+150% | 512 kB (per core) |
| Process | Intel 7 nm | 7 nm, 14 nm |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) | Zen 2 (2017−2020) |
| PassMark | 25,029+41% | 17,712 |
| 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 7232P uses SP3 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7232P |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | SP3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 192 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 2 | — |
| ECC Support | No | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | — |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13400F) / not specified (EPYC 7232P). Primary use case: Core i5-13400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-13400F rivals Ryzen 5 7600.
| Feature | Core i5-13400F | EPYC 7232P |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | — |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | — |
| Target Use | Gaming | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













