AMD EPYC 4124P vs Intel Core i5-13400 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark comparison between the AMD EPYC 4124P and the Intel Core i5-13400 is lopsided in favor of Intel, which claims 13 wins out of 17 recorded tests. The AMD processor wins only 4 tests, but those victories are concentrated in single-threaded and specific integer workloads. The most decisive Intel advantage appears in floating-point math, where the Core i5-13400 scores 58,786 against the EPYC's 31,518, a 46.4% gap. That is the largest performance difference in the entire comparison. Integer math follows a similar pattern, with Intel at 77,721 versus 52,855, a 32% lead. Data compression also favors Intel heavily: 301,481 versus 204,926, again a 32% difference. These three workloads alone establish the Core i5-13400 as the substantially stronger processor for compute-heavy tasks.

The multi-core rendering tests tell a consistent story. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Intel part posts 2,358 against the AMD's 1,538, a 34.8% advantage. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows a 24.8% gap (8,526 versus 6,410), and R23 multi-core narrows to only 4.3% (15,953 versus 15,264). Interestingly, the R23 multi-core result is the closest Intel multi-core win, which suggests the EPYC's architecture scales better as the workload becomes more demanding. Still, Intel wins all three multi-core rendering tests.

The single-core results split in an unusual way. In Cinebench R15 and R20 single-core, Intel wins by 16% and 24.9% respectively. However, in Cinebench R23 single-core, the AMD EPYC 4124P takes a decisive 20.6% lead (2,154 versus 1,786). The PassMark single-thread test also goes to AMD, with 3,897 against 3,538, a 10.1% margin. This pattern indicates that the EPYC's Zen 4 cores have higher peak performance, but Intel's hybrid architecture with its performance cores dominates in the older Cinebench versions.

The remaining Intel wins are spread across encryption, extended instructions, physics, and random string sorting. Data encryption shows a 26.8% Intel lead (15,880 versus 11,630). Extended instructions favor Intel by 21.5% (19,161 versus 15,049). Physics simulation goes to Intel by 12.6% (1,244 versus 1,087). Random string sorting shows a 21.4% Intel advantage (30,851 versus 24,259). The only other AMD win besides the single-thread tests is the find prime numbers benchmark, where the EPYC scores 89 against Intel's 74, a 20.3% margin.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-13400 establishes itself as the clear winner for multi-threaded productivity workloads. Every multi-core Cinebench test, every PassMark math test, and every data processing benchmark goes to Intel. The data shows Intel leading by margins ranging from 4.3% to 46.4% across these workloads. For users who run rendering, video encoding, database operations, or scientific simulations that use all available threads, the Core i5-13400 is the stronger choice. The 10-core, 16-thread configuration simply outmuscles the 4-core, 8-thread EPYC in parallel tasks.

The AMD EPYC 4124P wins in a narrower set of scenarios. The Cinebench R23 single-core result (20.6% ahead) and the PassMark single-thread result (10.1% ahead) indicate that the EPYC has superior per-thread performance. The find prime numbers benchmark, which measures integer-heavy single-threaded computation, also goes to AMD by 20.3%. This suggests the EPYC 4124P is better suited for workloads that are latency-sensitive or that depend on a few fast cores rather than many moderate ones. The average benchmark score for the EPYC is 23,167, while Intel's average is 24,280, a difference of roughly 4.6% in Intel's favor.

Both processors sit at the 76th percentile against all CPUs in the database, meaning they are statistically equivalent in overall standing. However, the distribution of wins matters: Intel dominates in volume of work, AMD wins in peak per-core performance. For a desktop user who occasionally runs heavy multi-threaded tasks but also values snappy single-threaded response, the EPYC's single-core wins could be attractive. For a workstation user who runs sustained parallel workloads, the Intel part is the obvious pick.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD EPYC 4124P is built on the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Raphael, using a 5 nm process from TSMC. The Intel Core i5-13400 uses the Raptor Lake architecture, codenamed Raptor Lake-S, on a 10 nm process from Intel. The process node difference is significant: AMD's 5 nm process allows for a smaller die size of 71 mm², while Intel's 10 nm process results in a 215 mm² die. The transistor counts reflect this: AMD packs 6,570 million transistors into its smaller die, while Intel's transistor count is not recorded in the database.

Core configurations diverge sharply. The EPYC 4124P has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Core i5-13400 has 10 cores and 16 threads. Intel's design uses a hybrid architecture with performance and efficiency cores, though the database does not specify the exact split. Clock speeds also differ: the EPYC has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, while Intel runs at 2.50 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost. Despite the lower base clock, Intel's higher core count compensates in multi-threaded tests.

Cache layouts are distinct. The EPYC allocates 64 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core, with 32 MB of shared L3. Intel provides 80 KB of L1 and 1.25 MB of L2 per core, with 20 MB of shared L3. Intel's larger per-core caches help in latency-sensitive workloads, while AMD's larger L3 pool benefits shared data access across cores. Memory support differs as well: the EPYC supports only DDR5 with dual-channel memory and 83.2 GB/s bandwidth, while Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory, though its bandwidth figure is not recorded. The EPYC supports ECC memory, while the Intel part does not.

PCIe connectivity also favors AMD. The EPYC provides 28 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, while Intel offers 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes. This makes the EPYC more suitable for systems with multiple high-bandwidth expansion cards. Integrated graphics differ: the EPYC includes Radeon Graphics, while the Core i5-13400 includes UHD Graphics 730. The EPYC is classified as a server/workstation part, while Intel is a desktop part. The EPYC uses AMD Socket AM5, Intel uses Socket 1700. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD EPYC 4124P boosts to 5.10 GHz, while the Intel Core i5-13400 reaches 4.60 GHz.

Q: How much faster is Intel in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: Intel scores 15,953 versus AMD's 15,264, a 4.3% advantage.

Q: Which processor wins in single-threaded PassMark tests?

A: The AMD EPYC 4124P scores 3,897, which is 10.1% higher than Intel's 3,538.

Q: Does the AMD EPYC support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the EPYC 4124P supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i5-13400 does not.

Q: What is the largest performance gap in the comparison?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark floating-point math, where Intel leads by 46.4% (58,786 versus 31,518).

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The EPYC averages 23,167, while Intel averages 24,280, putting Intel about 4.6% ahead overall.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear conclusion for heavy multi-threaded workloads: the Intel Core i5-13400 is the stronger processor. It wins 13 of 17 tests, including every major math benchmark and all but one multi-core rendering test. The 46.4% lead in floating-point math and the 32% lead in integer math are not marginal differences; they represent substantial performance advantages that matter for scientific computing, financial modeling, and content creation. The Intel part also leads in data compression by 32% and encryption by 26.8%, making it the better choice for file archiving and secure data handling.

The AMD EPYC 4124P is not without merit. Its single-core performance in Cinebench R23 and PassMark is superior by 20.6% and 10.1% respectively. The find prime numbers result (20.3% ahead) reinforces that the EPYC's individual cores are faster for certain integer operations. For users whose primary workloads are lightly threaded or depend on a few high-speed cores, the EPYC delivers better responsiveness. The EPYC also offers ECC memory support and 28 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, which are enterprise-oriented features that the Intel desktop part lacks.

The overall percentile ranking places both CPUs at the 76th percentile, meaning they are comparable in the broader CPU landscape. The average benchmark scores differ by only about 4.6%. The choice depends on workload profile: Intel for parallel throughput, AMD for per-core speed and enterprise features. The EPYC's 65 W TDP matches Intel's 65 W TDP, so power consumption is not a differentiator. The EPYC is a server/workstation part, while Intel targets desktops. For a typical desktop user, the Core i5-13400's multi-threaded dominance makes it the safer recommendation. For a workstation user prioritizing ECC and PCIe lanes with acceptable single-threaded performance, the EPYC 4124P is the better fit.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specification fields. The AMD EPYC 4124P has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core i5-13400 has 10 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 3.80 GHz for AMD and 2.50 GHz for Intel. Boost clocks are 5.10 GHz for AMD and 4.60 GHz for Intel. The process node is 5 nm for AMD and 10 nm for Intel. Die size is 71 mm² for AMD and 215 mm² for Intel. Transistor count is 6,570 million for AMD, with no figure recorded for Intel.

Cache sizes differ per core and in total. AMD has 64 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 per core, with 32 MB shared L3. Intel has 80 KB L1 and 1.25 MB L2 per core, with 20 MB shared L3. Memory support: AMD uses only DDR5, Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5. Memory bandwidth is 83.2 GB/s for AMD, not recorded for Intel. ECC memory support is present on AMD, absent on Intel. PCIe lanes: AMD has 28 Gen 5 lanes, Intel has 16 Gen 5 lanes. Integrated graphics: AMD has Radeon Graphics, Intel has UHD Graphics 730. Sockets differ: AMD Socket AM5 versus Intel Socket 1700. Market segments differ: server/workstation versus desktop. Release dates differ: May 2024 for AMD, January 2023 for Intel. The launch MSRP is $149 for AMD and $221 for Intel.