Core i7-13700K vs EPYC 9575F

CPU

GPU

Core i7-13700K

16 Cores24 Thrd125 WWMax: 5.4 GHz2022

Popular choices:

•••••••••

EPYC 9575F

64 Cores128 Thrd400 WWMax: 5 GHz2024

Popular choices:

••••••••i7-13700K•

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i7-13700K

16 / 24

45,784

0.0%

147,718

+222.6%

Ryzen 9 7900X3D

Ryzen 9 9950X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX

Ryzen Threadripper 9970X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9995WX

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 i7-13700K

2022

Why buy it

✅Costs $11,382 less on MSRP ($409 MSRP vs $11,791 MSRP).
✅Delivers 793.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 111.9 vs 12.5 PassMark/$ ($409 MSRP vs $11,791 MSRP).
✅Draws 125W instead of 400W, a 275W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel UHD Graphics 770, while EPYC 9575F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9575F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (18,980 vs 29,308).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9575F, which brings 64 cores / 128 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

EPYC 9575F

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +9.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 64 cores / 128 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 12.5 vs 111.9 PassMark/$ ($11,791 MSRP vs $409 MSRP).
❌220% higher power demand at 400W vs 125W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-13700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i7-13700K

2022

EPYC 9575F

2024

Why buy it

✅Costs $11,382 less on MSRP ($409 MSRP vs $11,791 MSRP).
✅Delivers 793.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 111.9 vs 12.5 PassMark/$ ($409 MSRP vs $11,791 MSRP).
✅Draws 125W instead of 400W, a 275W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel UHD Graphics 770, while EPYC 9575F needs a discrete GPU.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +9.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 64 cores / 128 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 9575F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (18,980 vs 29,308).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9575F, which brings 64 cores / 128 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.5 vs 111.9 PassMark/$ ($11,791 MSRP vs $409 MSRP).
❌220% higher power demand at 400W vs 125W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-13700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9575F better than Core i7-13700K?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 9575F makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i7-13700K is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, EPYC 9575F is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 9.0% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests. It also has a big cache advantage at 256 MB vs 30 MB.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9575F is the better fit. You are getting 54.4% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 64 cores and 128 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 753.3% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 30 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

EPYC 9575F is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i7-13700K makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. EPYC 9575F is 2782.9% more expensive on MSRP at $11,791 MSRP versus $409 MSRP, and it gives you a 9.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i7-13700K is also 793.5% better value on MSRP (111.9 vs 12.5 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

EPYC 9575F is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2022), 3D V-Cache and a much larger 256 MB L3 cache instead of 30 MB, and more multi-core headroom with 64 cores / 128 threads instead of 16/24. That should give you a better long-term upgrade path for motherboard, RAM, and future CPU swaps.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

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.

Core i7-13700K Benchmark Check

EPYC 9575F Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i7-13700K	EPYC 9575F
1080p
low	284 FPS	303 FPS
medium	268 FPS	280 FPS
high	223 FPS	232 FPS
ultra	190 FPS	196 FPS
1440p
low	238 FPS	268 FPS
medium	200 FPS	223 FPS
high	159 FPS	172 FPS
ultra	139 FPS	153 FPS
4K
low	159 FPS	186 FPS
medium	134 FPS	154 FPS
high	103 FPS	118 FPS
ultra	90 FPS	105 FPS

Open Core i7-13700K Open EPYC 9575F

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i7-13700K	EPYC 9575F
1080p
low	689 FPS	797 FPS
medium	580 FPS	681 FPS
high	484 FPS	536 FPS
ultra	439 FPS	466 FPS
1440p
low	595 FPS	657 FPS
medium	525 FPS	585 FPS
high	441 FPS	475 FPS
ultra	378 FPS	384 FPS
4K
low	348 FPS	367 FPS
medium	314 FPS	332 FPS
high	295 FPS	306 FPS
ultra	261 FPS	268 FPS

Open Core i7-13700K Open EPYC 9575F

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i7-13700K	EPYC 9575F
1080p
low	648 FPS	884 FPS
medium	530 FPS	721 FPS
high	467 FPS	652 FPS
ultra	405 FPS	553 FPS
1440p
low	591 FPS	689 FPS
medium	491 FPS	560 FPS
high	427 FPS	494 FPS
ultra	371 FPS	417 FPS
4K
low	434 FPS	487 FPS
medium	374 FPS	404 FPS
high	339 FPS	359 FPS
ultra	290 FPS	297 FPS

Open Core i7-13700K Open EPYC 9575F

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i7-13700K	EPYC 9575F
1080p
low	970 FPS	1118 FPS
medium	883 FPS	1007 FPS
high	766 FPS	884 FPS
ultra	689 FPS	797 FPS
1440p
low	829 FPS	884 FPS
medium	740 FPS	778 FPS
high	642 FPS	683 FPS
ultra	566 FPS	595 FPS
4K
low	567 FPS	645 FPS
medium	515 FPS	575 FPS
high	463 FPS	511 FPS
ultra	404 FPS	437 FPS

Open Core i7-13700K Open EPYC 9575F

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-13700K and EPYC 9575F

Core i7-13700K

The Core i7-13700K 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 16 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 3.4 GHz, with boost up to 5.4 GHz. L3 cache: 30 MB (total). 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: 45,784 points. Launch price was $409.

EPYC 9575F

The EPYC 9575F is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 64 cores and 128 threads. Base frequency is 3.3 GHz, with boost up to 5 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 400 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 147,718 points. Launch price was $11,791.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-13700K packs 16 cores / 24 threads, while the EPYC 9575F offers 64 cores / 128 threads — the EPYC 9575F has 48 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.4 GHz on the Core i7-13700K versus 5 GHz on the EPYC 9575F — a 7.7% clock advantage for the Core i7-13700K (base: 3.4 GHz vs 3.3 GHz). The Core i7-13700K uses the Raptor Lake, Raptor Cove, Gracemont (2022) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the EPYC 9575F uses Turin (2024) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-13700K scores 45,784 against the EPYC 9575F's 147,718 — a 105.4% lead for the EPYC 9575F. Multi-core Geekbench: 18,980 vs 29,308 (42.8% advantage for the EPYC 9575F). L3 cache: 30 MB (total) on the Core i7-13700K vs 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9575F.

Feature	Core i7-13700K	EPYC 9575F
Cores / Threads	16 / 24	64 / 128+300%
Boost Clock	5.4 GHz+8%	5 GHz
Base Clock	3.4 GHz+3%	3.3 GHz
L3 Cache	30 MB (total)	256 MB (total)+753%
L2 Cache	2 MB (per core)+100%	1 MB (per core)
Process	Intel 7 nm	4 nm-43%
Architecture	Raptor Lake, Raptor Cove, Gracemont (2022)	Turin (2024)
PassMark	45,784	147,718+223%
Cinebench R23 Multi	31,000	—
Geekbench 6 Single	2,846	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	18,980	29,308+54%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-13700K uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the EPYC 9575F uses SP5 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-5600 memory speed. The Core i7-13700K supports up to 192 GB of RAM compared to 6 TB — 187.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i7-13700K) vs 12 (EPYC 9575F). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i7-13700K) vs 128 (EPYC 9575F) — the EPYC 9575F offers 108 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel Z790,Intel H770,Intel B760,Intel Z690,Intel H670,Intel B660,Intel H610 (Core i7-13700K) and SP5 (EPYC 9575F).

Feature	Core i7-13700K	EPYC 9575F
Socket	LGA1700	SP5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-5600	DDR5-6000
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB	6 TB+3100%
RAM Channels	2	12+500%
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	128+540%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: true (Core i7-13700K) vs AMD-V, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9575F). The Core i7-13700K includes integrated graphics (Intel UHD Graphics 770), while the EPYC 9575F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: EPYC 9575F targets Data Center / High Frequency. Direct competitor: Core i7-13700K rivals Ryzen 9 7900X; EPYC 9575F rivals Xeon 6952P.

Feature	Core i7-13700K	EPYC 9575F
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	Intel UHD Graphics 770	—
Unlocked	Yes	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	true	AMD-V, SEV-SNP
Target Use	—	Data Center / High Frequency

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i7-13700K launched at $409 MSRP, while the EPYC 9575F debuted at $11791. On MSRP ($409 vs $11791), the Core i7-13700K is $11382 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-13700K delivers 111.9 pts/$ vs 12.5 pts/$ for the EPYC 9575F — making the Core i7-13700K the 159.7% better value option.