
Core i5-13600K
Popular choices:

EPYC 9354
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: +19.5% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $3,091 less on MSRP ($329 MSRP vs $3,420 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 429.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 114.5 vs 21.6 PassMark/$ ($329 MSRP vs $3,420 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 125W instead of 280W, a 155W reduction.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 770, while EPYC 9354 needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (37,655 vs 73,892).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (24 MB vs 256 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9354, which brings 32 cores / 64 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
EPYC 9354
2022Why buy it
- ✅+96.2% higher PassMark.
- ✅+966.7% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 24 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 32 cores / 64 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13600K across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 21.6 vs 114.5 PassMark/$ ($3,420 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
- ❌124% higher power demand at 280W vs 125W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i5-13600K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Core i5-13600K
2022EPYC 9354
2022Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +19.5% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $3,091 less on MSRP ($329 MSRP vs $3,420 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 429.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 114.5 vs 21.6 PassMark/$ ($329 MSRP vs $3,420 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 125W instead of 280W, a 155W reduction.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 770, while EPYC 9354 needs a discrete GPU.
Why buy it
- ✅+96.2% higher PassMark.
- ✅+966.7% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 24 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 32 cores / 64 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (37,655 vs 73,892).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (24 MB vs 256 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9354, which brings 32 cores / 64 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-13600K across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 21.6 vs 114.5 PassMark/$ ($3,420 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
- ❌124% higher power demand at 280W vs 125W.
- ❌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 9354?
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 9354 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 281 FPS | 176 FPS |
| medium | 264 FPS | 145 FPS |
| high | 220 FPS | 125 FPS |
| ultra | 188 FPS | 96 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 235 FPS | 153 FPS |
| medium | 198 FPS | 123 FPS |
| high | 158 FPS | 99 FPS |
| ultra | 138 FPS | 77 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 159 FPS | 71 FPS |
| medium | 133 FPS | 60 FPS |
| high | 102 FPS | 47 FPS |
| ultra | 90 FPS | 39 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-13600K | EPYC 9354 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 632 FPS | 534 FPS |
| medium | 533 FPS | 466 FPS |
| high | 450 FPS | 374 FPS |
| ultra | 416 FPS | 304 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 540 FPS | 439 FPS |
| medium | 474 FPS | 392 FPS |
| high | 403 FPS | 324 FPS |
| ultra | 351 FPS | 255 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 316 FPS | 270 FPS |
| medium | 282 FPS | 246 FPS |
| high | 269 FPS | 216 FPS |
| ultra | 238 FPS | 179 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-13600K | EPYC 9354 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 663 FPS | 673 FPS |
| medium | 543 FPS | 562 FPS |
| high | 477 FPS | 523 FPS |
| ultra | 414 FPS | 455 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 600 FPS | 511 FPS |
| medium | 499 FPS | 426 FPS |
| high | 434 FPS | 390 FPS |
| ultra | 376 FPS | 337 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 441 FPS | 377 FPS |
| medium | 381 FPS | 295 FPS |
| high | 344 FPS | 263 FPS |
| ultra | 295 FPS | 211 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-13600K | EPYC 9354 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 941 FPS | 937 FPS |
| medium | 941 FPS | 856 FPS |
| high | 923 FPS | 735 FPS |
| ultra | 831 FPS | 648 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 941 FPS | 751 FPS |
| medium | 850 FPS | 658 FPS |
| high | 738 FPS | 561 FPS |
| ultra | 651 FPS | 480 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 651 FPS | 539 FPS |
| medium | 588 FPS | 484 FPS |
| high | 529 FPS | 423 FPS |
| ultra | 437 FPS | 366 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-13600K and EPYC 9354

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 9354
EPYC 9354
The EPYC 9354 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 November 2022 (3 years ago). It is based on the Genoa (2022−2023) architecture. It features 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 3.25 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm, 6 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 280 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 73,892 points. Launch price was $3,420.
Processing Power
The Core i5-13600K packs 14 cores / 20 threads, while the EPYC 9354 offers 32 cores / 64 threads — the EPYC 9354 has 18 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.1 GHz on the Core i5-13600K versus 3.8 GHz on the EPYC 9354 — a 29.2% clock advantage for the Core i5-13600K (base: 3.5 GHz vs 3.25 GHz). The Core i5-13600K uses the Raptor Lake, Raptor Cove, Gracemont (2022) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the EPYC 9354 uses Genoa (2022−2023) (5 nm, 6 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-13600K scores 37,655 against the EPYC 9354's 73,892 — a 65% lead for the EPYC 9354. L3 cache: 24 MB on the Core i5-13600K vs 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9354.
| Feature | Core i5-13600K | EPYC 9354 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 14 / 20 | 32 / 64+129% |
| Boost Clock | 5.1 GHz+34% | 3.8 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.5 GHz+8% | 3.25 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 24 MB | 256 MB (total)+967% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB (per core)+100% | 1 MB (per core) |
| Process | Intel 7 nm | 5 nm, 6 nm-29% |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake, Raptor Cove, Gracemont (2022) | Genoa (2022−2023) |
| PassMark | 37,655 | 73,892+96% |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-13600K uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the EPYC 9354 uses SP5 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-5600 on the Core i5-13600K versus 4800 on the EPYC 9354 — the EPYC 9354 supports 199.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9354 supports up to 6144 of RAM compared to 192 GB — 187.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-13600K) vs 12 (EPYC 9354). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-13600K) vs 128 (EPYC 9354) — the EPYC 9354 offers 108 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel 600 series,Intel 700 series (Core i5-13600K) and SP5 (EPYC 9354).
| Feature | Core i5-13600K | EPYC 9354 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | SP5 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0 | PCIe 5.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-5600 | 4800+95900% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 192 GB+3276700% | 6144 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 12+500% |
| 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. Only the EPYC 9354 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-13600K) vs VT-x, VT-d, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9354). The Core i5-13600K includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 770), while the EPYC 9354 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-13600K targets Desktop. Direct competitor: EPYC 9354 rivals Xeon Platinum 8468.
| Feature | Core i5-13600K | EPYC 9354 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | UHD Graphics 770 | None |
| Unlocked | Yes | No |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d, SEV-SNP |
| Target Use | Desktop | — |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-13600K launched at $329 MSRP, while the EPYC 9354 debuted at $3420. On MSRP ($329 vs $3420), the Core i5-13600K is $3091 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-13600K delivers 114.5 pts/$ vs 21.6 pts/$ for the EPYC 9354 — making the Core i5-13600K the 136.5% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-13600K | EPYC 9354 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $329-90% | $3420 |
| Performance per Dollar | 114.5+430% | 21.6 |
| Release Date | 2022 | 2022 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













