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 i9-12900T review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£420PassMark multi-core score:28950N. of physical cores:16CPU boost clock speed:4.9 GHzCPU socket:LGA1700TDP (Thermal design power):35 W

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

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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components

40%

8.2

Technical score

25%

?

Reviews scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.2, the mark of a weaker model in this category

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 84% of processors
7.9

Value for money

Value for money
7.9/ 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
Score components

70%

7.7

Overall score

30%

8.3

Price

â–²Better than 81%
8.2

Technical score

Technical score
8.2/ 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
Score components

60%

8.6

Performance

18%

7.7

Architecture

10%

8.1

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.2

Power & Thermal

4%

8.9

Platform

1%

7.4

Integrated graphics

â–²Better than 89%
?

Reviews score

Reviews score
✕
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
Grades by review (0)
We have not found an independent test of this model yet. Until we do, its review part counts as 7.2.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
No expert tests yet
?

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~ £420
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading...
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i9-12900T

Technical score
Technical score
8.2/ 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
Score components:

60%

8.6

Performance

18%

7.7

Architecture

10%

8.1

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.2

Power & Thermal

4%

8.9

Platform

1%

7.4

Integrated graphics

8.2
Reviews score
7.2
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.9/ 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
Score components:

70%

7.7

Overall score

30%

8.3

Price

7.9
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, 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
16
This processor has 16 CPU cores, which is more than 90% of processors and equal to 4.6% of processors.
CPU threads
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
4.9 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.9 GHz which is higher than that of 73.7% of processors and equal to that of 4.7% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
8x 1.4 GHz & 8x 1.0 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 8x1.4 GHz & 8x1.0 GHz which is higher than that of 61.6% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
28,950
This processor scores 28,950 in PassMark, which is higher than 84.9% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
10 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
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
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
1,408 KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 1,408 KB which is larger than that of 92.5% of processors and equal to that of 1.6% 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
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
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
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
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)
35 W
This processor has a TDP of 35 W which is lower than that of 53.2% of processors and equal to that of 14% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
35 W
This processor has a base power of 35 W which is lower than that of 53.3% of processors and equal to that of 14.1% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
106 W
This processor has a boost power of 106 W which is higher than that of 65.8% of processors and equal to that of 0.9% of processors.
Tau (power duration limit)
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 i9-12900T vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 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
  • 2.52x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (28,950 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    28,950 vs 11,469
  • 2.35x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (12,252 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    12,252 vs 5,209
  • 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
  • 45.9% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,732 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,732 vs 2,558
  • 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
  • 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
  • 7.8% better value for money
    Intel Core i9-12900T has better value for money than the average processor (7.85 vs 7.3).
    7.85 vs 7.29
  • Modern CPU socket
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA1700 vs FP5).
    LGA1700 vs FP5
  • More extensive crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more extensive crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES, SHA, RSA/PKA vs AES, SHA).
    AES, SHA, RSA/PKA vs AES, SHA
  • Supports heterogeneous scheduling
    This processor uses heterogeneous multi-processing, while the average processor does not. 24.8% of processors use it.
  • 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
  • 2.52x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (28,950 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    28,950 vs 11,469
  • 2.35x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (12,252 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    12,252 vs 5,209
  • 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
  • 45.9% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,732 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,732 vs 2,558
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • 48.3% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,276 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,276 vs 1,535
  • 11.4% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (4.9 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4.9 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (8x1.4 GHz & 8x1 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    8x1.4 GHz & 8x1.0 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
  • 2.5x higher bus transfer rate
    This processor has a higher bus transfer rate than the average processor (20 GT/s vs 8 GT/s). The average processor offers bus transfer rate of 8 GT/s.
    20 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 3
    3 vs 2
  • 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: 0.5 MB shared
    1.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 3.67x larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (1,408 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    1,408 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.
  • 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
  • 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
  • 22.2% lower base power
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (35 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    35 W vs 45 W
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 51.3% slower Blender rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (193.8 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    193.8 vs 398.015
  • 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
  • 65.6% higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (106 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    106 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, 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
  • 68% more expensive
    Intel Core i9-12900T is more expensive than the average processor (£420 vs £250).
    £420 vs £250
  • 14 lower clock multiplier
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (14 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    14 vs 28
  • 68% more expensive
    Intel Core i9-12900T is more expensive than the average processor (£420 vs £250).
    £420 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
  • 51.3% slower Blender rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (193.8 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    193.8 vs 398.015
  • 14 lower clock multiplier
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (14 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    14 vs 28
  • 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, 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.
  • 65.6% higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (106 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    106 W vs 64 W

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Core i9-12900T

  • Excellent power efficiency for a flagship-class 16-core processor with a 35W base TDP.
  • Strong multi-threaded performance, making it ideal for compact workstations and non-gaming use cases like container hosting.
  • Maintains high boost clock speeds (up to 4.9GHz) when thermal headroom allows, providing bursts of high performance.
  • Lower thermal output compared to 'K' series models, allowing for use in small form factor (SFF) builds with quieter cooling.
  • Supports modern standards including DDR5 memory and PCIe 5.0 for future-proofing.

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

  • Lower base clock speeds compared to the 12900K, which can lead to lower sustained performance in heavy gaming or rendering.
  • Actual power draw can significantly exceed the 35W TDP rating during turbo boost, sometimes reaching over 100W.
  • Considered poor value by some users compared to the i7-12700, which offers similar core counts for a lower price.
  • Limited availability in the retail market as 'T' series chips are often prioritized for OEM and pre-built systems.
  • Requires high-end cooling to maintain peak boost clocks despite its low-power designation.

Verdict

The Intel Core i9-12900T is a high-performance desktop processor from the 12th Gen Alder Lake series, featuring a hybrid architecture with 16 cores (8 Performance-cores and 8 Efficient-cores) and 24 threads. It is distinguished by its low 35W base power (TDP), though it can reach a maximum turbo power of 106W, and offers a max turbo frequency of 4.90 GHz alongside a 30 MB Intel Smart Cache. Key advantages include its exceptional energy efficiency for a flagship-tier chip, support for both DDR5 (up to 4800 MT/s) and PCIe 5.0, and integrated Intel UHD Graphics 770, making it ideal for powerful small form factor builds. However, its lower base clock speeds of 1.4 GHz for P-cores and 1.0 GHz for E-cores result in lower sustained performance compared to standard K-series models, and it lacks support for ECC memory.

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

No results found