AMD EPYC 7473X vs Intel Core i5-10400 Comparison

The AMD EPYC 7473X and Intel Core i5-10400 occupy different corners of the processor market, one built for server racks and the other for desktop towers. The data recorded in the database shows a complete sweep for the EPYC part across all shared benchmark tests, but the magnitude of those wins and the context of each chip’s intended role matter more than the raw numbers alone. This analysis breaks down the head-to-head results, answers common questions from the recorded data, and outlines where each processor fits based on measured performance.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains six direct comparisons between the AMD EPYC 7473X and the Intel Core i5-10400, all drawn from the Cinebench suite. In every single test, the EPYC 7473X emerges as the winner, with the delta hovering around 506 percent across the board.

Starting with Cinebench R15, the multicore test shows the EPYC 7473X scoring 5078 against the i5-10400’s 838, a delta of 506 percent in favor of the AMD part. The single-core R15 result follows the same pattern: the EPYC scores 716, the Intel scores 118, and the delta is 506.8 percent. These are not marginal gaps. The EPYC part delivers roughly six times the performance in both threaded and single-threaded rendering workloads within this benchmark.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the multicore score for the EPYC 7473X is 21162, while the i5-10400 manages 3492. That is a delta of 506 percent. The single-core R20 test shows 2987 for the EPYC and 493 for the Intel, again a 505.9 percent delta. The pattern holds exactly: the AMD chip is about six times faster in both metrics.

Cinebench R23, the most recent of the three versions in the database, repeats the story. The multicore result has the EPYC 7473X at 50388 and the i5-10400 at 8316, a 505.9 percent delta. The single-core R23 test shows 7113 versus 1174, also a 505.9 percent delta. Across all six benchmarks, the EPYC 7473X wins every test, and the delta never drops below 505.9 percent.

The consistency of these deltas suggests a fixed performance ratio between the two parts in Cinebench workloads. The EPYC 7473X does not merely edge out the i5-10400 in one or two tests; it dominates every rendering scenario the database records. For a builder or system planner looking at these two processors, the head-to-head data leaves no ambiguity about which one produces higher scores in Cinebench.

However, the database also records benchmark data for the i5-10400 that does not appear in the head-to-head table, including 3DMark and PassMark tests. These results are not compared directly against the EPYC 7473X, so they cannot be used to claim a win for either part. The six shared tests all favor the AMD processor, and the wins tally shows 6 for the EPYC 7473X and 0 for the Intel Core i5-10400.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD EPYC 7473X has an average benchmark score of 14574, while the Intel Core i5-10400 has an average score of 14037. The EPYC part sits about 3.8 percent higher in this aggregate metric, based on the recorded values.

Q: How do the two processors compare in terms of percentile ranking?

A: The EPYC 7473X ranks in the 69th percentile against all CPUs, and the i5-10400 ranks in the 68th percentile. These are nearly identical positions, indicating that despite the massive Cinebench delta, both parts fall in a similar tier when compared against the full range of processors in the database.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each processor based on average score?

A: For the EPYC 7473X, the nearest rival is the Intel Xeon 6315P with an identical average score of 14574 and a delta of 0 percent. Other close competitors include the AMD Ryzen 5 5500U at 14589 (delta of -0.1 percent) and the Intel Core i5-9600K at 14605 (delta of -0.2 percent). For the i5-10400, the nearest rival is the AMD EPYC 7552 at 14115 (delta of -0.6 percent), followed by the AMD EPYC 7443 at 13936 (delta of 0.7 percent) and the Intel Xeon 6756E at 14163 (delta of -0.9 percent).

Q: Does the EPYC 7473X support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the EPYC 7473X has ECC memory support enabled. The i5-10400 does not support ECC memory, as indicated in the recorded specifications.

Q: What integrated graphics does each processor include?

A: The Intel Core i5-10400 includes UHD Graphics 630. The AMD EPYC 7473X has no integrated graphics, so a discrete GPU is required for display output on that platform.

Q: How many memory channels does each processor use?

A: The EPYC 7473X uses an eight-channel memory bus with a recorded bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s. The i5-10400 uses a dual-channel memory bus with a bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. This is a significant difference in memory throughput capacity.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split in intended use cases. The AMD EPYC 7473X is a server and workstation processor with 24 cores and 48 threads, a 240 TDP, and support for eight-channel DDR4 memory. The Intel Core i5-10400 is a desktop processor with 6 cores and 12 threads, a 65 TDP, and dual-channel memory support. These are not competing products in the same segment; they serve different markets entirely.

For anyone running multi-threaded server workloads, virtualization, or heavy rendering tasks that scale with core count, the EPYC 7473X is the obvious choice based on the benchmark data. Its Cinebench scores are roughly six times higher than the i5-10400, and its memory bandwidth is nearly five times greater. The 768 MB of shared L3 cache dwarfs the 12 MB shared cache on the Intel part, which directly benefits workloads with large working sets.

For a desktop user building a mainstream PC, the i5-10400 offers a lower TDP and integrated graphics, which simplifies system construction. Its percentile ranking of 68 is nearly identical to the EPYC’s 69, indicating that for typical desktop tasks, the performance gap seen in server-oriented benchmarks does not translate to a massive difference in overall standing. The i5-10400 also has a higher boost clock at 4.30 GHz versus 3.70 GHz, which can help in lightly threaded applications.

The verdict from the recorded data is straightforward: pick the EPYC 7473X if the workload demands many cores, massive cache, and high memory bandwidth. Pick the i5-10400 if the system is a desktop build with modest power and cooling requirements, and if integrated graphics are needed. The benchmark results do not show any scenario where the i5-10400 beats the EPYC 7473X, but the two chips are designed for different physical and financial contexts, so the choice depends on the platform.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification recorded in the database. The EPYC 7473X has 24 cores and 48 threads, while the i5-10400 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The base clock on the AMD part is 2.80 GHz, and the Intel part starts at 2.90 GHz. The boost clock favors Intel at 4.30 GHz, while the EPYC tops out at 3.70 GHz.

Thermal design power differs by a wide margin: the EPYC 7473X has a TDP of 240, and the i5-10400 has a TDP of 65. The sockets are incompatible: the AMD chip uses Socket SP3, and the Intel chip uses Socket 1200. The EPYC 7473X supports eight-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s, while the i5-10400 uses dual-channel DDR4 with a bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. ECC memory support is present on the EPYC but absent on the Intel part.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The EPYC 7473X offers Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only), while the i5-10400 offers Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics field is empty for the EPYC, while the i5-10400 lists UHD Graphics 630. The market segment for the EPYC is Server/Workstation, and for the Intel part it is Desktop. Both processors are marked as Active in production status, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The underlying architectures are generations apart. The EPYC 7473X uses Zen 3 architecture under the codename Milan-X, built on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The i5-10400 uses Comet Lake architecture, also its codename, built on a 14 nm process at Intel. The EPYC’s transistor count is listed as 33,200 million, and its die size is 8x 81 mm². The Intel part has no recorded transistor count or die size in the database.

Cache configurations differ dramatically. The EPYC 7473X has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and a shared L3 cache of 768 MB. The i5-10400 has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and a shared L3 cache of 12 MB. The EPYC’s L3 cache is 64 times larger than the Intel part’s, which reflects the server-oriented design for handling massive datasets.

The release dates are also distinct: the EPYC 7473X launched on 2022-03-21, and the i5-10400 launched on 2020-04-29. The EPYC’s part number is listed as 100-000000507 WOF100-000000507, while the Intel part number is SRH3CSRH78. The EPYC 7473X has a launch MSRP of $3900, while the i5-10400 has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the benchmark and specification data, the EPYC 7473X wins every shared test. The Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multicore and single-core results all favor the AMD part, with deltas around 506 percent. The wins tally shows 6 for the EPYC and 0 for the i5-10400. There is no recorded benchmark where the Intel part outperforms the AMD chip.

The EPYC 7473X also wins on memory bandwidth, offering 204.8 GB/s against the i5-10400’s 42.7 GB/s. It wins on core and thread count, with 24 cores and 48 threads against 6 cores and 12 threads. It wins on L3 cache capacity, with 768 MB shared versus 12 MB shared. It wins on PCIe generation and lane count, with Gen 4 and 128 lanes against Gen 3 and 16 lanes. It wins on ECC support, which is present on the AMD part and absent on the Intel part.

The i5-10400 wins on boost clock, reaching 4.30 GHz compared to the EPYC’s 3.70 GHz. It wins on base clock, starting at 2.90 GHz versus 2.80 GHz. It wins on TDP, drawing 65 against the EPYC’s 240, which makes it easier to cool in a desktop chassis. It wins on the process node in terms of age, but the 14 nm Intel node is older than the 7 nm TSMC node used by AMD, so that is not a performance advantage. The i5-10400 also has integrated graphics, which the EPYC lacks, giving it a functional win for systems without a discrete GPU.

For use cases, the EPYC 7473X wins in server racks, virtualization hosts, multi-threaded rendering, and any workload that benefits from 48 threads, 768 MB of L3 cache, and eight-channel memory. The i5-10400 wins in compact desktop builds, office systems, and light gaming setups where power draw and integrated graphics matter more than raw core count. The data does not suggest any overlap where the i5-10400 can match the EPYC in heavy parallel workloads, but the lower TDP and integrated GPU give it a distinct niche.