
Core i5-13600K
Popular choices:

EPYC 7513
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 i5-13600K
2022Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +15.8% higher average FPS across 45 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $2,511 less on MSRP ($329 MSRP vs $2,840 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 444.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 114.5 vs 21.0 PassMark/$ ($329 MSRP vs $2,840 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 125W instead of 200W, a 75W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (37,655 vs 59,745).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (24 MB vs 128 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7513, which brings 32 cores / 64 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
EPYC 7513
2021Why buy it
- ✅+58.7% higher PassMark.
- ✅+433.3% larger total L3 cache (128 MB vs 24 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 32 cores / 64 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13600K across 45 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 21.0 vs 114.5 PassMark/$ ($2,840 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
- ❌60% higher power demand at 200W vs 125W.
- ❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while Core i5-13600K moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i5-13600K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Core i5-13600K
2022EPYC 7513
2021Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +15.8% higher average FPS across 45 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $2,511 less on MSRP ($329 MSRP vs $2,840 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 444.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 114.5 vs 21.0 PassMark/$ ($329 MSRP vs $2,840 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 125W instead of 200W, a 75W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
Why buy it
- ✅+58.7% higher PassMark.
- ✅+433.3% larger total L3 cache (128 MB vs 24 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 32 cores / 64 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (37,655 vs 59,745).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (24 MB vs 128 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7513, which brings 32 cores / 64 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13600K across 45 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 21.0 vs 114.5 PassMark/$ ($2,840 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
- ❌60% higher power demand at 200W vs 125W.
- ❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while Core i5-13600K moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i5-13600K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i5-13600K better than EPYC 7513?
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 i5-13600K | EPYC 7513 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 281 FPS | 195 FPS |
| medium | 264 FPS | 159 FPS |
| high | 220 FPS | 129 FPS |
| ultra | 188 FPS | 100 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 235 FPS | 160 FPS |
| medium | 198 FPS | 125 FPS |
| high | 158 FPS | 97 FPS |
| ultra | 138 FPS | 77 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 159 FPS | 72 FPS |
| medium | 133 FPS | 60 FPS |
| high | 102 FPS | 47 FPS |
| ultra | 90 FPS | 39 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-13600K | EPYC 7513 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 632 FPS | 507 FPS |
| medium | 533 FPS | 442 FPS |
| high | 450 FPS | 353 FPS |
| ultra | 416 FPS | 287 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 540 FPS | 417 FPS |
| medium | 474 FPS | 373 FPS |
| high | 403 FPS | 307 FPS |
| ultra | 351 FPS | 242 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 316 FPS | 257 FPS |
| medium | 282 FPS | 233 FPS |
| high | 269 FPS | 204 FPS |
| ultra | 238 FPS | 170 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-13600K | EPYC 7513 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 663 FPS | 850 FPS |
| medium | 543 FPS | 705 FPS |
| high | 477 FPS | 657 FPS |
| ultra | 414 FPS | 580 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 600 FPS | 612 FPS |
| medium | 499 FPS | 506 FPS |
| high | 434 FPS | 464 FPS |
| ultra | 376 FPS | 405 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 441 FPS | 437 FPS |
| medium | 381 FPS | 339 FPS |
| high | 344 FPS | 303 FPS |
| ultra | 295 FPS | 245 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-13600K | EPYC 7513 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 941 FPS | 990 FPS |
| medium | 941 FPS | 898 FPS |
| high | 923 FPS | 774 FPS |
| ultra | 831 FPS | 670 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 941 FPS | 761 FPS |
| medium | 850 FPS | 664 FPS |
| high | 738 FPS | 568 FPS |
| ultra | 651 FPS | 489 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 651 FPS | 546 FPS |
| medium | 588 FPS | 487 FPS |
| high | 529 FPS | 428 FPS |
| ultra | 437 FPS | 370 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13600K and EPYC 7513

Core i5-13600K
Core i5-13600K
The Core i5-13600K is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 27 September 2022 (3 years ago). It is based on the Raptor Lake, Raptor Cove, Gracemont (2022) architecture. It features 14 cores and 20 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 5.1 GHz. L3 cache: 24 MB. L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR4, DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 37,655 points. Launch price was $319.

EPYC 7513
EPYC 7513
The EPYC 7513 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 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 3.65 GHz. L3 cache: 128 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm+ process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 200 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 59,745 points. Launch price was $2,840.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13600K packs 14 cores / 20 threads, while the EPYC 7513 offers 32 cores / 64 threads — the EPYC 7513 has 18 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.1 GHz on the Core i5-13600K versus 3.65 GHz on the EPYC 7513 — a 33.1% clock advantage for the Core i5-13600K (base: 3.5 GHz vs 2.6 GHz). The Core i5-13600K uses the Raptor Lake, Raptor Cove, Gracemont (2022) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the EPYC 7513 uses Milan (2021−2023) (7 nm+). In PassMark, the Core i5-13600K scores 37,655 against the EPYC 7513's 59,745 — a 45.4% lead for the EPYC 7513. L3 cache: 24 MB on the Core i5-13600K vs 128 MB (total) on the EPYC 7513.
| Feature | Core i5-13600K | EPYC 7513 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 14 / 20 | 32 / 64+129% |
| Boost Clock | 5.1 GHz+40% | 3.65 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.5 GHz+35% | 2.6 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 24 MB | 128 MB (total)+433% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB (per core)+300% | 512 kB (per core) |
| Process | Intel 7 nm | 7 nm+ |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake, Raptor Cove, Gracemont (2022) | Milan (2021−2023) |
| PassMark | 37,655 | 59,745+59% |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-13600K uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the EPYC 7513 uses SP3 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-5600 on the Core i5-13600K versus 3200 on the EPYC 7513 — the EPYC 7513 supports 199.4% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 7513 supports up to 4096 of RAM compared to 192 GB — 182.1% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-13600K) vs 8 (EPYC 7513). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13600K) vs 128 (EPYC 7513) — the EPYC 7513 offers 108 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel 600 series,Intel 700 series (Core i5-13600K) and SP3 (EPYC 7513).
| Feature | Core i5-13600K | EPYC 7513 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | SP3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-5600 | 3200+63900% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 192 GB+4915100% | 4096 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 8+300% |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | 128+540% |
Advanced Features
Only the Core i5-13600K has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. The Core i5-13600K includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 770), while the EPYC 7513 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-13600K targets Desktop. Direct competitor: EPYC 7513 rivals Xeon Platinum 8380.
| Feature | Core i5-13600K | EPYC 7513 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | UHD Graphics 770 | None |
| Unlocked | Yes | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d |
| Target Use | Desktop | — |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-13600K launched at $329 MSRP, while the EPYC 7513 debuted at $2840. On MSRP ($329 vs $2840), the Core i5-13600K is $2511 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13600K delivers 114.5 pts/$ vs 21.0 pts/$ for the EPYC 7513 — making the Core i5-13600K the 137.9% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-13600K | EPYC 7513 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $329-88% | $2840 |
| Performance per Dollar | 114.5+445% | 21.0 |
| Release Date | 2022 | 2021 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













