OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

Intel Core i5-12400 review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£170PassMark multi-core score:18791N. of physical cores:6CPU boost clock speed:4.4 GHzCPU socket:LGA1700TDP (Thermal design power):65 W

Intel Core i5-12400 Review: Compare 74 technical specifications, 30 expert and video reviews and 4 best-of lists to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

Intel Core i5-12400
7.7/10

Overall score

Score
7.7/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 85% of models
Score components

40%

6.9

Technical score

25%

8.8

Reviews score

25%

8.2

List score

10%

6.9

Sentiment score

▲Better than 85% of processors
8.3

Value for money

Value for money
8.3/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 95% of models
Score components

70%

7.7

Overall score

30%

9.6

Price

★Better than 95%
6.9

Technical score

Technical score
6.9/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 67% of models
Score components

60%

6.6

Performance

18%

7.0

Architecture

10%

8.0

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.5

Power & Thermal

4%

8.9

Platform

1%

7.2

Integrated graphics

▲Better than 67%
8.8

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.8/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 98% of models

80%

8.6

Average grade

20%

9.5

Popularity

Grades by review (30)
14 reviews: 6 with a printed score, 8 estimated from the review. 16 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
★Better than 98%
8.2

List score

List score
8.2/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (4)
List score: in 4 of 87 lists (5%)
★Better than 96%
  • intel-core-i5-12400
  • intel-core-i5-12400
  • intel-core-i5-12400
  • intel-core-i5-12400
  • intel-core-i5-12400
  • intel-core-i5-12400
  • intel-core-i5-12400
  • intel-core-i5-12400
intel-core-i5-12400
intel-core-i5-12400
intel-core-i5-12400
intel-core-i5-12400
intel-core-i5-12400
intel-core-i5-12400
intel-core-i5-12400
intel-core-i5-12400
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the Intel Core i5-12400

Based on 11 · 17

A frugal, great-value gaming chip, though reviewers grumble about motherboard choices, memory support and no overclocking.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i5-12400

Technical score
Technical score
6.9/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 67% of models
Score components:

60%

6.6

Performance

18%

7.0

Architecture

10%

8.0

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.5

Power & Thermal

4%

8.9

Platform

1%

7.2

Integrated graphics

6.9
Reviews score
8.8
List score
8.2
Value for money
Value for money
8.3/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 95% of models
Score components:

70%

7.7

Overall score

30%

9.6

Price

8.3
Processor type
desktop
This processor belongs to the desktop processor class, which is more advanced than that of 54.7% of processors and equal to that of 39.5% of processors.
CPU socket
LGA1700
This processor uses the LGA1700 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 84.5% of processors and equal to that of 8.4% of processors.
Chipset
Z790, H770, B760, Z690, H670, B660, H610, Q670, W680
This processor supports Z790, H770, B760, Z690, H670, B660, H610, Q670, W680 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 86.4% of processors and equal to that of 2.3% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, CLMUL, BMI1, BMI2, ADX
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, CLMUL, BMI1, BMI2, ADX instruction sets, which is broader support than 92.5% of processors and equal to that of 0.3% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
N. of physical cores
6
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 6 CPU cores, which is more than 47.7% of processors and equal to 13.4% of processors.
CPU threads
12
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 12 CPU threads, which is more than 53% of processors and equal to 14.2% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.4 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.4 GHz which is higher than that of 48.6% of processors and equal to that of 5.1% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
6x 2.5 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 6x2.5 GHz which is higher than that of 52.7% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
18,791
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 18,791 in PassMark, which is higher than 66.6% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Semiconductor size
10 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 10 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 50.8% of processors and equal to that of 19.5% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 7
This processor is built on the Intel 7 foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 64.8% of processors and equal to that of 15.7% of processors.
L3 cache
18 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 18 MB which is larger than that of 74.9% of processors and equal to that of 2.6% of processors.
L2 cache
7.5 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 7.5 MB which is larger than that of 71% of processors and equal to that of 0.9% of processors.
L1 cache
?
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4/DDR5
This processor supports DDR DDR4/DDR5, which is newer than that of 77.1% of processors and equal to that of 10.7% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
4,800 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 4,800 MHz, which is higher than that of 64.6% of processors and equal to 6% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR5-4800 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR5-4800 MHz, which is higher than that of 62.3% of processors and equal to 6.7% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
?
Maximum memory capacity
128 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 128 GB of memory, which is more than 59.3% of processors and equal to 22.8% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
Intel UHD Graphics 730
This processor uses the Intel UHD Graphics 730 integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 54.4% of processors and equal to that in 2.1% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
24
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 24 GPU execution units, which is more than 49.1% of processors and equal to 20.8% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
300 MHz
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 300 MHz which is lower than that of 57.8% of processors and equal to that of 38.4% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
AV1 (HW decode)
This processor supports AV1 (HW decode) media codecs, which is narrower support than 61.3% of processors and equal to 10.3% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
TDP (Thermal design power)
65 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 65 W which is higher than that of 68% of processors and equal to that of 17% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
65 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 65 W which is higher than that of 68.1% of processors and equal to that of 17.4% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
117 W
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 117 W which is higher than that of 74.9% of processors and equal to that of 0.5% of processors.
Tau (power duration limit)
28 seconds
Market range: <8 seconds – >28 seconds
This processor has a turbo duration of 28 seconds which is longer than that of 4.4% of processors and equal to that of 85.3% of processors.
Configurable TDP
no
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 53.7% of processors offer this.
Show more
What reviewers say

Intel Core i5-12400 vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 70.1% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (8,859 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    8,859 vs 5,209
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (5 vs 3).
    5.0 vs 3.0
  • 35.3% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,462 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,462 vs 2,558
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Alder Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Alder Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 63.8% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (18,791 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    18,791 vs 11,469
  • 2.5x more L2 per core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (1.3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    1.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 31.3% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.8/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ★ Better than 98% of models

    80%

    8.6

    Average grade

    20%

    9.5

    Popularity

    Grades by review (30)
    14 reviews: 6 with a printed score, 8 estimated from the review. 16 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.8 vs 6.7
  • 77.7% better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (4,984 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    4,984 vs 2,804.5
  • 31.3% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.8/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ★ Better than 98% of models

    80%

    8.6

    Average grade

    20%

    9.5

    Popularity

    Grades by review (30)
    14 reviews: 6 with a printed score, 8 estimated from the review. 16 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.8 vs 6.7
  • 13.5% better value for money
    Intel Core i5-12400 has better value for money than the average processor (8.27 vs 7.3).
    8.27 vs 7.29
  • 5.1% higher list score
    List score
    8.2/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
    How we count it
    Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
    Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
    Lists with this model (4)
    List score: in 4 of 87 lists (5%)
    8.2 vs 7.8
  • Modern CPU socket
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA1700 vs FP5).
    LGA1700 vs FP5
  • Broader instruction support
    This processor supports a broader instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, CLMUL, BMI1, BMI2, ADX vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, CLMUL, BMI1, BMI2, ADX vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 70.1% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (8,859 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    8,859 vs 5,209
  • 35.3% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,462 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,462 vs 2,558
  • 63.8% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (18,791 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    18,791 vs 11,469
  • 77.7% better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (4,984 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    4,984 vs 2,804.5
  • 43.6% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,205 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,205 vs 1,535
  • 2 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (6 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    6 vs 4
  • 34.5% higher Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a higher Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (659 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    659 vs 490
  • 4 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (12 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    12 vs 8
  • 2x higher bus transfer rate
    This processor has a higher bus transfer rate than the average processor (16 GT/s vs 8 GT/s). The average processor offers bus transfer rate of 8 GT/s.
    16 GT/s vs 8 GT/s
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Alder Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Alder Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 2.5x more L2 per core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (1.3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    1.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 2.5x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (7.5 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    7.5 MB vs 3 MB
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (Intel 7 vs Intel 14 nm).
    Intel 7 vs Intel 14 nm
  • 2x larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (18 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    18 MB vs 9 MB
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (5 vs 3).
    5.0 vs 3.0
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR4/DDR5 vs DDR4).
    DDR4/DDR5 vs DDR4
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 4 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (20 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    20 vs 16
  • 2x more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (128 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    128 GB vs 64 GB
  • 63.8% higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (76.8 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    76.8 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • 50% higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (4,800 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    4,800 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • 1 more supported displays
    This processor has more supported displays than the average processor (4 vs 3). The average processor supports 3 displays.
    4 vs 3
  • Includes a cooler
    This processor includes a cooler, while the average processor does not. 26.9% of processors include a cooler.
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 82.8% higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (117 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    117 W vs 64 W
  • 44.4% higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    65 W vs 45 W
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • 44.4% higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    65 W vs 45 W
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 82.8% higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (117 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    117 W vs 64 W
  • 44.4% higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    65 W vs 45 W
  • 44.4% higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    65 W vs 45 W

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

9.0
Digital David
≈ estimated
01/07/2022
Hands-on review · unboxing and benchmark tests
Verdict
Intel Core i5-12400 may be the best value among 12th-gen chips, and it is strong for gaming, streaming and content creation.
9.0
The Tech Tank
≈ estimated
14/02/2022
Hands-on review · benchmarks, games and temperatures
Verdict
Intel Core i5-12400 is an easy pick for gaming at this price, though a new motherboard adds cost.
9.0
Tech Notice
≈ estimated
03/02/2022
Hands-on review · creator benchmarks and application tests
Verdict
Intel Core i5-12400 is a good pick for budget creators, though a limited motherboard choice is its main drawback.
9.0
Gamers Nexus
≈ estimated
14/01/2022
Hands-on review · benchmarks versus AMD and older CPUs
Verdict
Intel Core i5-12400 is a strong value CPU for gaming and budget builds, though AMD still leads in compression.
9.0
Techtesters
≈ estimated
13/01/2022
Hands-on review · gaming tests and value comparison
Verdict
Intel Core i5-12400 is an excellent budget CPU for anyone building a new system, though a new platform adds cost.
9.5
RedGamingTech
≈ estimated
04/01/2022
Hands-on review · benchmarks, gaming and comparison tests
Verdict
Intel Core i5-12400 is an excellent chip, competitive with AMD's 5600X at a very reasonable price.
9.0
Gamers Nexus
≈ estimated
01/03/2022
Comparison review · benchmarks, power and value
Verdict
Intel Core i5-12400 is still a strong value pick, and the 12500's extra cost is hard to justify.
8.0
Chill Builds
≈ estimated
31/12/2021
Hands-on test · Cinebench R23 and Blender benchmarks
Verdict
Intel Core i5-12400 performs very well, and the included stock cooler handles the load well.
Shop video
Overview video
Not graded

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

10
guru3d.com
✓ explicit
04/01/2022
Benchmark review · Mainstream gaming CPU
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-12400 is a six-core chip that matches the Ryzen 5 5600X in gaming and beats it in Blender, but it cannot be overclocked.
10
club386.com
✓ explicit
04/01/2022
Hands-on review · Six-core CPU
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-12400 is a six-core chip that matches the Ryzen 5 5600X in gaming and suits mainstream PCs with a B660 board and DDR4 memory.
7.0
computerbase.de
≈ estimated
04/02/2022
Benchmark test · Power limits
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-12400 is the weakest of the 12th-gen Core i5 lineup, and the Core i5-12500 is the better pick for its higher clock and stronger graphics.
7.7
pcgameshardware.de
✓ explicit
28/01/2022
Benchmark test · Gaming and applications
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-12400 matches the Ryzen 5 5600X in games, runs about 30% ahead of the Ryzen 5 3600 and older Core i5s, but its boxed cooler is weak.
9.0
pcwelt.de
≈ estimated
06/02/2022
Benchmark test · Gaming frame rates
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-12400 is a fast, efficient six-core for gaming that matches the Ryzen 5 5600X, though it can't be officially overclocked.
8.0
igorslab.de
≈ estimated
04/01/2022
Hands-on test · Gaming and BIOS
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-12400 needs a recent BIOS to reach its full speed, and it lacks AVX-512, a feature Intel dropped for this chip.
9.0
clubic.com
✓ explicit
18/01/2022
Lab test · Gaming and power draw
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-12400 is a six-core for gaming and everyday work that matches the Ryzen 5 5600X and draws the least power of Alder Lake chips.
9.0
tomshardware.fr
≈ estimated
05/01/2022
Lab test · Gaming efficiency
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-12400 is a gaming chip that draws very little power and runs close to the Ryzen 5 5600X in games.
8.0
hardwarecooking.fr
≈ estimated
04/01/2022
Full test · Gaming CPU
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-12400 is a six-core gaming chip without hybrid cores, and its motherboard choice decides whether it runs DDR4 or DDR5 memory.
9.0
profesionalreview.com
✓ explicit
04/01/2022
Hands-on test · Gaming and power
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-12400 is a six-core for gaming and multitasking that runs close to the Ryzen 5 5600X and is the lowest-power Alder Lake chip tested.
9.0
techgaming.nl
✓ explicit
04/01/2022
Gaming test · Mainstream CPU
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-12400 is a six-core gaming chip that keeps pace with the Core i9-12900K in GPU-limited games and is best matched with a DDR4 B660 board.
9.0
techtesters.eu
≈ estimated
14/01/2022
Video review · Alder Lake chip
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-12400 brings fast Alder Lake cores to a mainstream chip; the written review is positive, but the test details are only in the video.
9.0
tweakers.net
≈ estimated
04/01/2022
Benchmark test · Budget processor
Verdict
The Intel Core i5 12400 is a strong budget chip that nearly matches the Ryzen 5 5600X in games but falls behind in multithreaded work.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Core i5-12400

  • Excellent value for money, often described as a 'budget king' for gaming
  • Strong single-core performance that rivals more expensive flagship models from previous generations
  • Highly energy-efficient with a low 65W TDP, making it easy to cool and quiet during operation
  • Versatile platform support for both DDR4 and newer DDR5 memory
  • Includes an integrated GPU (UHD 730), useful for troubleshooting or systems without a dedicated graphics card

What customers don't like about Intel Core i5-12400

  • The included stock cooler is often cited as loud or difficult to install, with some users reporting high temperatures under heavy load
  • Lacks the 'Efficiency' cores (E-cores) found in higher-tier 12th Gen models like the i5-12600K
  • Limited multi-threaded performance for extremely demanding professional workloads like 8K video editing
  • Locked multiplier means it cannot be overclocked in the traditional sense
  • Motherboard costs (LGA1700) were initially high compared to the budget nature of the CPU

Verdict

The Intel Core i5-12400 is a highly efficient 12th-generation Alder Lake desktop processor featuring 6 Performance cores (P-cores) and 12 threads, with a base clock speed of 2.5 GHz and a max turbo boost of up to 4.4 GHz. Built on the Intel 7 process with an 18 MB Smart Cache and a 65W TDP (117W max turbo power), it supports both DDR4-3200 and DDR5-4800 memory alongside PCIe 5.0 connectivity on the LGA 1700 socket. Its primary pros include exceptional price-to-performance value, strong single-core gaming performance that often rivals more expensive competitors like the Ryzen 5 5600X, and the inclusion of integrated UHD Graphics 730 and a stock cooler. However, its main cons are the lack of hybrid architecture Efficiency cores (E-cores) found in higher-tier Alder Lake chips, a locked multiplier that prevents traditional overclocking, and an included stock cooler that can become noisy under heavy loads.

Compare Intel Core i5-12400 with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Intel Core i5-12400 and other processors

No results found