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 i7-12800H review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£600PassMark multi-core score:23891N. of physical cores:14CPU boost clock speed:4.8 GHzCPU socket:FCBGA1744TDP (Thermal design power):45 W

Intel Core i7-12800H Review: Compare 74 technical specifications and 1 expert reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

7.6/10

Overall score

Score
7.6/ 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 81% of models
Score components

40%

7.9

Technical score

25%

7.3

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 81% of processors
7.5

Value for money

Value for money
7.5/ 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 60% of models
Score components

70%

7.6

Overall score

30%

7.4

Price

▲Better than 60%
7.9

Technical score

Technical score
7.9/ 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 84% of models
Score components

60%

8.1

Performance

18%

7.5

Architecture

10%

7.7

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.9

Power & Thermal

4%

7.9

Platform

1%

8.1

Integrated graphics

▲Better than 84%
7.3

Reviews score

Reviews score
7.3/ 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 57% of models

80%

7.9

Average grade

20%

5.0

Popularity

Grades by review (1)
1 review, with a printed score. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
▼Worse than 57%
?

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~ £600
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 i7-12800H

Technical score
Technical score
7.9/ 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 84% of models
Score components:

60%

8.1

Performance

18%

7.5

Architecture

10%

7.7

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.9

Power & Thermal

4%

7.9

Platform

1%

8.1

Integrated graphics

7.9
Reviews score
7.3
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.5/ 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 60% of models
Score components:

70%

7.6

Overall score

30%

7.4

Price

7.5
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
FCBGA1744
This processor uses the FCBGA1744 CPU socket, which is older than that of 73.1% of processors and equal to that of 4.8% of processors.
Chipset
N/A
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, SHA
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, AES, SHA instruction sets, which is narrower support than 52.6% of processors and equal to that of 1.7% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
14
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 14 CPU cores, which is more than 85.7% of processors and equal to 4.3% of processors.
CPU threads
20
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 20 CPU threads, which is more than 84.3% of processors and equal to 5% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.8 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.8 GHz which is higher than that of 69.2% of processors and equal to that of 4.4% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
6x 2.4 GHz & 8x 1.8 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 6x2.4 GHz & 8x1.8 GHz which is higher than that of 80.9% of processors and equal to that of 0.2% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
23,891
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 23,891 in PassMark, which is higher than 77.9% 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
24 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 24 MB which is larger than that of 80.1% of processors and equal to that of 5.9% of processors.
L2 cache
11.5 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 11.5 MB which is larger than that of 80.9% of processors and equal to that of 2.1% of processors.
L1 cache
1,216 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 1,216 KB which is larger than that of 89.3% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR4X/LPDDR5
This processor supports DDR DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR4X/LPDDR5, which is newer than that of 95.9% of processors and equal to that of 1.4% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
5,200 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 5,200 MHz, which is higher than that of 70.6% of processors and equal to 6.6% 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
64 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 64 GB of memory, which is more than 27.2% of processors and equal to 26.1% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
Intel Iris Xe Graphics 96EU
This processor uses the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 96EU integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 81% of processors and equal to that in 2.7% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
96
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 96 GPU execution units, which is more than 94.8% of processors and equal to 4.1% 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
TDP (Thermal design power)
45 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 45 W which is lower than that of 41.9% of processors and equal to that of 10.8% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
45 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 45 W which is lower than that of 41.9% of processors and equal to that of 11% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
115 W
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 115 W which is higher than that of 68.1% of processors and equal to that of 6.6% of processors.
Tau (power duration limit)
?
Configurable TDP
yes
This processor supports configurable TDP. 46.4% of processors offer this.
Show more

Intel Core i7-12800H vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 2.44x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (12,728 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    12,728 vs 5,209
  • 8 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (14 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    14 vs 6
  • 2.08x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (23,891 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    23,891 vs 11,469
  • 12 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (20 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    20 vs 8
  • 2.09x better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (5,854 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    5,854 vs 2,804.5
  • 12 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (28 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    28 vs 16
  • 54.8% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,376 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,376 vs 1,535
  • 3.83x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (11.5 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    11.5 MB vs 3 MB
  • 9.0% higher review score
    Reviews score
    7.3/ 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 57% of models

    80%

    7.9

    Average grade

    20%

    5.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (1)
    1 review, with a printed score. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    7.3 vs 6.7
  • Supports heterogeneous scheduling
    This processor uses heterogeneous multi-processing, while the average processor does not. 24.8% of processors use it.
  • 2.44x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (12,728 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    12,728 vs 5,209
  • 8 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (14 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    14 vs 6
  • 2.08x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (23,891 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    23,891 vs 11,469
  • 12 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (20 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    20 vs 8
  • 2.09x better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (5,854 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    5,854 vs 2,804.5
  • 54.8% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,376 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,376 vs 1,535
  • 43.5% higher Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a higher Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (703 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    703 vs 490
  • 32.2% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,382 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,382 vs 2,558
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (6x2.4 GHz & 8x1.8 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    6x2.4 GHz & 8x1.8 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 9.1% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (4.8 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4.8 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 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
  • More advanced Turbo Core
    This processor has a more advanced Turbo Core version than the average processor (3 vs 2).
    Turbo Boost Technology 3
    3 vs 2
  • 3.83x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (11.5 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    11.5 MB vs 3 MB
  • 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.
  • 3.17x larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (1,216 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    1,216 KB vs 384 KB
  • 2.67x larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (24 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    24 MB vs 9 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
  • 12 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (28 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    28 vs 16
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR4X/LPDDR5 vs DDR4).
    DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR4X/LPDDR5 vs DDR4
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (4 vs 3).
    4 vs 3
  • 62.5% higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (5,200 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    5,200 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • 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
  • 4x more GPU execution units
    This processor has more GPU execution units than the average processor (96 vs 24). The average processor has 24 GPU execution units.
    96 vs 24
  • Better integrated GPU
    This processor uses a better integrated GPU than the average processor (Intel Iris Xe Graphics 96EU vs Intel UHD Graphics 630).
    Intel Iris Xe Graphics 96EU vs Intel UHD Graphics 630
  • 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
  • 79.7% higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (115 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    115 W vs 64 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)
  • 22.6% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (217 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    217 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 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, SHA 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, SHA vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 2.4x more expensive
    Intel Core i7-12800H is more expensive than the average processor (£600 vs £250).
    £600 vs £250
  • 39.2% slower classroom rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (206.7 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    206.68 vs 340.075
  • Older CPU socket
    This processor uses an older CPU socket than the average processor (FCBGA1744 vs FP5).
    FCBGA1744 vs FP5
  • 2.4x more expensive
    Intel Core i7-12800H is more expensive than the average processor (£600 vs £250).
    £600 vs £250
  • 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, SHA 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, SHA 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 (FCBGA1744 vs FP5).
    FCBGA1744 vs FP5
  • 39.2% slower classroom rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (206.7 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    206.68 vs 340.075
  • 22.6% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (217 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    217 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 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)
  • 79.7% higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (115 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    115 W vs 64 W

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.9
notebookcheck.nl
✓ explicit
12/03/2022
Lab test · Gaming laptop
Verdict
The Intel Core i7-12800H is a fast 12th-gen laptop chip, but in the Razer Blade 15 it scores slightly below the average for this processor.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Core i7-12800H

  • Excellent multi-core performance for simulation and rendering (e.g., Solidworks, MATLAB)
  • Significant single-thread performance lead (up to 25%) over previous-gen Ryzen counterparts
  • Support for modern memory standards including DDR5-4800 and LPDDR5-5200
  • Hardware-level 'Thread Director' optimizes task distribution between P and E cores
  • Full 'Enterprise' vPro features for remote management
  • Reliable gaming performance when paired with a mid-to-high-end GPU

What customers don't like about Intel Core i7-12800H

  • High power consumption, especially when pushing max turbo clocks (up to 115W)
  • Can run quite hot, with users reporting temperatures frequently reaching 90°C under load
  • Significantly lower efficiency on battery compared to Apple M-series chips
  • Performance is highly dependent on the laptop's cooling solution and power limits
  • Locked multiplier prevents manual overclocking
  • Integrated graphics are outclassed by newer architectures

Verdict

The Intel Core i7-12800H is a high-end mobile processor from the 12th Gen Alder Lake-H series, featuring a hybrid architecture with 14 cores (6 Performance-cores and 8 Efficient-cores) and 20 threads. It operates at a base clock of 2.4 GHz for P-cores (1.8 GHz for E-cores) with a maximum turbo frequency of 4.8 GHz, supported by a 24 MB L3 Intel Smart Cache and a 45W base TDP that can scale up to 115W. Main advantages include exceptional multi-threaded performance for gaming and content creation, support for both DDR5-4800 and DDR4-3200 memory, and integrated Intel Iris Xe graphics with 96 execution units. Additionally, it features full vPro Enterprise support for enhanced remote management. However, primary drawbacks include high power consumption under load and significant heat generation, which can lead to thermal throttling and reduced battery life in many laptop designs.

Compare Intel Core i7-12800H 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 i7-12800H and other processors

No results found