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 i9-12900 review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£380PassMark multi-core score:33666N. of physical cores:16CPU boost clock speed:5.1 GHzCPU socket:LGA1700TDP (Thermal design power):65 W

Intel Core i9-12900 Review: Compare 74 technical specifications and 2 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

Intel Core i9-12900
7.8/10

Overall score

Score
7.8/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 89% of models
Score components

40%

8.5

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

â–²Better than 89% 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 86% of models
Score components

70%

7.8

Overall score

30%

8.5

Price

â–²Better than 86%
8.5

Technical score

Technical score
8.5/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 94% of models
Score components

60%

9.1

Performance

18%

7.7

Architecture

10%

8.4

Memory & PCIe

7%

5.7

Power & Thermal

4%

8.4

Platform

1%

7.4

Integrated graphics

★Better than 94%
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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 57% of models

80%

7.5

Average grade

20%

6.5

Popularity

Grades by review (2)
1 review, its grade estimated from the review text. 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.
â–¼Worse 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
  • intel-core-i9-12900
  • intel-core-i9-12900
  • intel-core-i9-12900
  • intel-core-i9-12900
  • intel-core-i9-12900
  • intel-core-i9-12900
intel-core-i9-12900
intel-core-i9-12900
intel-core-i9-12900
intel-core-i9-12900
intel-core-i9-12900
intel-core-i9-12900
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.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i9-12900

Technical score
Technical score
8.5/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 94% of models
Score components:

60%

9.1

Performance

18%

7.7

Architecture

10%

8.4

Memory & PCIe

7%

5.7

Power & Thermal

4%

8.4

Platform

1%

7.4

Integrated graphics

8.5
Reviews score
7.3
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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 86% of models
Score components:

70%

7.8

Overall score

30%

8.5

Price

8.0
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
SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512
This processor supports SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 instruction sets, which is narrower support than 83.5% of processors and equal to that of 2.2% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
16
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 16 CPU cores, which is more than 90% of processors and equal to 4.6% of processors.
CPU threads
24
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 24 CPU threads, which is more than 89.7% of processors and equal to 4.4% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
5.1 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 5.1 GHz which is higher than that of 84.5% of processors and equal to that of 4.3% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
8x 2.4 GHz & 8x 1.8 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 8x2.4 GHz & 8x1.8 GHz which is higher than that of 87.8% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
33,666
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 33,666 in PassMark, which is higher than 89.3% 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
30 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 30 MB which is larger than that of 86.9% of processors and equal to that of 2% of processors.
L2 cache
14 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 14 MB which is larger than that of 86.1% of processors and equal to that of 2.3% of processors.
L1 cache
1,433.6 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 1,433.6 KB which is larger than that of 94.1% of processors and equal to that of 0.3% 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)
?
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.
Integrated GPU model
Intel UHD Graphics 770
This processor uses the Intel UHD Graphics 770 integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 57.8% of processors and equal to that in 4.7% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
32
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 32 GPU execution units, which is more than 70.1% of processors and equal to 10.1% 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)
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)
202 W
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 202 W which is higher than that of 92% of processors and equal to that of 0.3% 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

Intel Core i9-12900 vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 2.94x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (33,666 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    33,666 vs 11,469
  • 10 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (16 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    16 vs 6
  • 2.53x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (13,160 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    13,160 vs 5,209
  • 3.6x better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (10,097 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    10,097 vs 2,804.5
  • 56.6% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (4,005 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    4,005 vs 2,558
  • 16 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (24 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    24 vs 8
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (5 + 4 vs 3).
    5.0 + 4.0 vs 3.0
  • 63.5% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,510 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,510 vs 1,535
  • 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
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 57% of models

    80%

    7.5

    Average grade

    20%

    6.5

    Popularity

    Grades by review (2)
    1 review, its grade estimated from the review text. 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.
    7.3 vs 6.7
  • 10.1% better value for money
    Intel Core i9-12900 has better value for money than the average processor (8.02 vs 7.3).
    8.02 vs 7.29
  • Modern CPU socket
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA1700 vs FP5).
    LGA1700 vs FP5
  • Supports heterogeneous scheduling
    This processor uses heterogeneous multi-processing, while the average processor does not. 24.8% of processors use it.
  • More extensive crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more extensive crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES, SHA, PCLMULQDQ vs AES, SHA).
    AES, SHA, PCLMULQDQ vs AES, SHA
  • 2.94x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (33,666 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    33,666 vs 11,469
  • 10 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (16 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    16 vs 6
  • 2.53x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (13,160 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    13,160 vs 5,209
  • 3.6x better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (10,097 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    10,097 vs 2,804.5
  • 56.6% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (4,005 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    4,005 vs 2,558
  • 16 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (24 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    24 vs 8
  • 63.5% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,510 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,510 vs 1,535
  • 15.9% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.1 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    5.1 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 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
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (8x2.4 GHz & 8x1.8 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    8x2.4 GHz & 8x1.8 GHz vs 4x3.4 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
  • 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 Technology 2
    3.0 vs 2.0
  • 4.67x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (14 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    14 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
  • 3.73x larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (1,433.6 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    1,433.6 KB vs 384 KB
  • Mixed big and small cores
    This processor uses a big.LITTLE design, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors use one.
    P-cores + E-cores
  • 3.33x larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (30 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    30 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
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (5 + 4 vs 3).
    5.0 + 4.0 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
  • Supports ECC memory
    This processor supports ECC memory, while the average processor does not. 32% of processors support it.
  • 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.
  • 3.16x higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (202 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    202 W vs 64 W
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 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)
  • 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
  • 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
  • 52% more expensive
    Intel Core i9-12900 is more expensive than the average processor (£380 vs £250).
    £380 vs £250
  • 52% more expensive
    Intel Core i9-12900 is more expensive than the average processor (£380 vs £250).
    £380 vs £250
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 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
  • 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.
  • 3.16x higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (202 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    202 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

8.0
Tech Notice
≈ estimated
05/05/2022
Comparison · benchmarks against the 12900K
Verdict
Intel Core i9-12900 is a very good performer that becomes appealing when priced well below the 12900K, though cooling needs care.
Not graded

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

6.0
computerbase.de
≈ estimated
22/03/2022
Lab test · Power limit analysis
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-12900 is a cooler, lower-power version of the flagship, but it drops to about 3 GHz in long, heavy workloads.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Core i9-12900

  • Exceptional single-core performance, making it a top-tier choice for gaming and snappiness.
  • Strong multi-threaded capabilities suitable for professional workloads like video editing and RAW photo processing.
  • Support for modern platform features including DDR5 memory and PCIe 5.0.
  • Improved energy efficiency during light tasks due to the new hybrid P-core and E-core architecture.
  • Competitive pricing compared to high-end AMD alternatives at the time of its release.

What customers don't like about Intel Core i9-12900

  • High power consumption and significant heat generation under heavy sustained loads.
  • Requires a high-end cooling solution (like a 360mm AIO) to prevent thermal throttling.
  • High total cost of ownership when factoring in the need for a new LGA1700 motherboard and expensive DDR5 RAM.
  • Performance is best optimized on Windows 11, which may be a drawback for users preferring older operating systems.
  • Questionable value compared to the i7-12700K, which offers similar gaming performance for a lower price.

Verdict

The Intel Core i9-12900 is a high-end 12th Gen 'Alder Lake' desktop processor featuring a hybrid architecture with 16 cores (8 Performance-cores and 8 Efficient-cores) and 24 threads. It operates at a base power of 65W with a maximum turbo power of 202W, reaching boost speeds up to 5.1 GHz on its P-cores and 3.8 GHz on its E-cores. Key technical advantages include 30 MB of Intel Smart Cache, support for both DDR5 (up to 4800 MT/s) and DDR4 (up to 3200 MT/s) memory, and PCIe 5.0 connectivity. Main pros include exceptional single-core performance for gaming, robust multi-threaded capabilities for content creation, and an integrated UHD Graphics 770 chip. However, notable cons include significant heat generation under heavy load, high power consumption during turbo bursts, and the requirement for a newer LGA 1700 socket motherboard.

Compare Intel Core i9-12900 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 i9-12900 and other processors

No results found