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 i5-12450HX review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£95PassMark multi-core score:17862N. of physical cores:8CPU boost clock speed:4.4 GHzCPU socket:FCBGA1964TDP (Thermal design power):55 W

Intel Core i5-12450HX Review: Compare 74 technical specifications and 1 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

7.1/10

Overall score

Score
7.1/ 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 65% of models
Score components

40%

7.0

Technical score

25%

7.0

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.0, the mark of a weaker model in this category

▲Better than 65% of processors
8.0

Value for money

Value for money
8.0/ 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 86% of models
Score components

70%

7.1

Overall score

30%

10

Price

▲Better than 86%
7.0

Technical score

Technical score
7.0/ 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 68% of models
Score components

60%

7.1

Performance

18%

6.8

Architecture

10%

7.8

Memory & PCIe

7%

5.5

Power & Thermal

4%

7.9

Platform

1%

7.6

Integrated graphics

▲Better than 68%
7.0

Reviews score

Reviews score
7.0/ 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
▼ Worse than 62% of models

7.0

Mark 7.3 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.9

Average grade

20%

5.0

Popularity

Grades by review (1)
1 video review, 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.
▼Worse than 62%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 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 (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £95
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i5-12450HX

Technical score
Technical score
7.0/ 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 68% of models
Score components:

60%

7.1

Performance

18%

6.8

Architecture

10%

7.8

Memory & PCIe

7%

5.5

Power & Thermal

4%

7.9

Platform

1%

7.6

Integrated graphics

7.0
Reviews score
7.0
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
8.0/ 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 86% of models
Score components:

70%

7.1

Overall score

30%

10

Price

8.0
Processor type
mobile
This processor belongs to the mobile processor class, which is more advanced than that of 6.9% of processors and equal to that of 47.7% of processors.
CPU socket
FCBGA1964
This processor uses the FCBGA1964 CPU socket, which is older than that of 69.7% of processors and equal to that of 1.5% of processors.
Chipset
HM670, WM690
This processor supports HM670, WM690 chipsets, which is narrower compatibility than 62.6% of processors and equal to that of 0.5% 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, FMA3, AES
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, AES instruction sets, which is narrower support than 60.1% of processors and equal to that of 3.8% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
8
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 8 CPU cores, which is more than 61.2% of processors and equal to 13.9% 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
4x 2.4 GHz & 4x 1.8 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 4x2.4 GHz & 4x1.8 GHz which is higher than that of 57.5% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
17,862
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 17,862 in PassMark, which is higher than 63.8% of processors.
Show more
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
12 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 12 MB which is larger than that of 52% of processors and equal to that of 9.3% of processors.
L2 cache
7 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 7 MB which is larger than that of 70.8% of processors and equal to that of 0.2% of processors.
L1 cache
704 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 704 KB which is larger than that of 77% of processors and equal to that of 0.5% of processors.
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)
N/A
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
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Intel UHD Graphics
Integrated GPU model
Intel UHD Graphics 710
This processor uses the Intel UHD Graphics 710 integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 53.7% of processors and equal to that in 0.7% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
16
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 16 GPU execution units, which is fewer than 56.5% of processors and equal to 6.2% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
350 MHz
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 350 MHz which is higher than that of 42.7% of processors and equal to that of 25.4% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)
This processor supports H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode) media codecs, which is broader support than 85.4% of processors and equal to 5.4% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
55 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 55 W which is higher than that of 61.7% of processors and equal to that of 4.2% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
55 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 55 W which is higher than that of 61.8% of processors and equal to that of 4.3% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
157 W
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 157 W which is higher than that of 83.5% of processors and equal to that of 3.1% of processors.
Tau (power duration limit)
?
Configurable TDP
no
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 53.7% of processors offer this.
Show more

Intel Core i5-12450HX vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 3.95x better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (11,085 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    11,085 vs 2,804.5
  • 3.42x higher Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a higher Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (1,678 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    1,678 vs 490
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (5 vs 3).
    5 vs 3
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Alder Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Alder Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • 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.
    E-core cluster: 2 MB shared
    1.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 55.7% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (17,862 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    17,862 vs 11,469
  • 29% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,300 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,300 vs 2,558
  • 9.8% better value for money
    Intel Core i5-12450HX has better value for money than the average processor (8 vs 7.3).
    8 vs 7.29
  • 2.63x cheaper
    Intel Core i5-12450HX is cheaper than the average processor (£95 vs £250).
    £95 vs £250
  • Supports heterogeneous scheduling
    This processor uses heterogeneous multi-processing, while the average processor does not. 24.8% of processors use it.
  • 3.95x better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (11,085 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    11,085 vs 2,804.5
  • 3.42x higher Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a higher Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (1,678 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    1,678 vs 490
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • 55.7% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (17,862 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    17,862 vs 11,469
  • 29% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,300 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,300 vs 2,558
  • 50.1% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (7,817 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    7,817 vs 5,209
  • 40.2% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,152 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,152 vs 1,535
  • 2 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (8 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    8 vs 6
  • 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
  • 2 wider front-end design
    This processor has a higher front-end width than the average processor (6 vs 4). The average processor uses front-end width of 4.
    6 vs 4
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (4x2.4 GHz & 4x1.8 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    4x2.4 GHz & 4x1.8 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 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 Turbo Core
    This processor has a more advanced Turbo Core version than the average processor (3 vs 2).
    Intel Turbo Boost Max Technology 3
    3 vs 2
  • 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.
    E-core cluster: 2 MB shared
    1.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • Mixed big and small cores
    This processor uses a big.LITTLE design, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors use one.
  • 2.33x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (7 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    7 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
  • 83.3% larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (704 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    704 KB vs 384 KB
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (5 vs 3).
    5 vs 3
  • 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
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 2.45x higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (157 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    157 W vs 64 W
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, AES 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, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 18.9% less L3 per core
    This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.5 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    1.5 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 21.5% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (215 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    215 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • 22.2% higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (55 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    55 W vs 45 W
  • 22.2% higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (55 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    55 W vs 45 W
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, AES 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, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Older CPU socket
    This processor uses an older CPU socket than the average processor (FCBGA1964 vs FP5).
    FCBGA1964 vs FP5
  • 18.9% less L3 per core
    This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.5 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    1.5 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 21.5% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (215 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    215 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 2.45x higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (157 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    157 W vs 64 W
  • 22.2% higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (55 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    55 W vs 45 W
  • 22.2% higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (55 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    55 W vs 45 W

Video reviews

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

9.0
Shiv Tech Smart
≈ estimated
20/03/2026
Hands-on review · CPU, thermal and gaming tests
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-12450HX is a clear buy in its price range, thanks to strong CPU and GPU performance.
Hands-on video, no verdict
Shop video

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Core i5-12450HX

  • Excellent 'bang for the buck' performance for budget-friendly gaming and productivity laptops
  • Strong multi-core performance (8 cores, 12 threads) suitable for heavy multitasking, coding, and professional workloads
  • Capable of handling modern AAA games at 1080p when paired with a decent dedicated GPU like the RTX 4050 or 4060
  • Avoids the reported motherboard stability issues found in newer 13th and 14th gen Intel HX variants
  • Supports modern DDR5 memory (up to 4800 MT/s) for faster data handling

What customers don't like about Intel Core i5-12450HX

  • High power consumption leads to poor battery life, often lasting only 2–3 hours under light use
  • Significant heat generation, with core temperatures frequently reaching 85–98°C during heavy stress
  • Integrated Intel UHD graphics are very weak and struggle with any gaming without a dedicated GPU
  • Single-core performance is somewhat dated, barely matching older mid-range chips in some benchmarks
  • Relies heavily on dual-channel RAM configurations to avoid performance bottlenecks

Verdict

The Intel Core i5-12450HX is a mid-range mobile processor based on the Alder Lake architecture, featuring 8 cores (4 Performance and 4 Efficient) and 12 threads with a max turbo frequency of 4.40 GHz. It includes 12 MB of Intel Smart Cache, supports both DDR5-4800 and DDR4-3200 memory, and operates with a base power of 55W that can scale up to a maximum turbo power of 157W. Its main advantages include an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, support for advanced PCIe 5.0 connectivity, and strong single-core performance suitable for gaming and general productivity. However, it suffers from high power consumption under load, limited integrated graphics with only 16 execution units, and lacks support for vPro or ECC memory.

Compare Intel Core i5-12450HX 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 i5-12450HX and other processors

No results found