PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Celeron 925 vs Core i5-12400F FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Celeron 925 vs Core i5-12400F: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Celeron 925

2011

Why buy it

✅Costs $74 less on MSRP ($100 MSRP vs $174 MSRP).
✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-12400F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (525 vs 19,532).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (1 MB vs 18 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 5.3 vs 112.3 PassMark/$ ($100 MSRP vs $174 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-12400F.

Core i5-12400F

2022

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +1476.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+1700% larger total L3 cache (18 MB vs 1 MB).
✅Delivers 2038.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 112.3 vs 5.3 PassMark/$ ($174 MSRP vs $100 MSRP).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Celeron 925.

Trade-offs

❌
74% HIGHER MSRP
$174 MSRPvs$100 MSRP
❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-12400F better than Celeron 925?

Yes. Core i5-12400F is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1476.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 3620.4% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i5-12400F is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1476.0% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i5-12400F is the stronger fit. You are getting 3620.4% better PassMark, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 1700% larger total L3 cache (18 MB vs 1 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core i5-12400F is the better buy right now. Core i5-12400F comes in 74.0% more expensive on MSRP at $174 MSRP versus $100 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1476.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 2038.1% better value on MSRP (112.3 vs 5.3 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core i5-12400F makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2022 vs 2011), a healthier platform with LGA1700 and DDR5 instead of the older platform, and 1700% larger total L3 cache (18 MB vs 1 MB). That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

Celeron 925 vs Core i5-12400F Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Celeron 925

The Celeron 925 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. Base frequency: 2.3 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache. Built on 45 nm process technology. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 525 points. Launch price was $69.

Core i5-12400F

The Core i5-12400F is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 January 2022 (3 years ago). It is based on the Alder Lake-S (2022) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 4.4 GHz. L3 cache: 18 MB (total). L2 cache: 1.25 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 19,532 points. Launch price was $180.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-12400F is built on the Alder Lake-S (2022) architecture. In PassMark, the Celeron 925 scores 525 against the Core i5-12400F's 19,532 — a 189.5% lead for the Core i5-12400F. L3 cache: 1 MB L2 Cache on the Celeron 925 vs 18 MB (total) on the Core i5-12400F.

Feature	Celeron 925	Core i5-12400F
Cores / Threads	—	6 / 12
Boost Clock	—	4.4 GHz
Base Clock	2.3 GHz	2.5 GHz+9%
L3 Cache	1 MB L2 Cache	18 MB (total)+1700%
L2 Cache	—	1.25 MB (per core)
Process	45 nm	Intel 7 nm-84%
Architecture	—	Alder Lake-S (2022)
PassMark	525	19,532+3620%
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	12,380
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,700
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	657

🧠

Memory & Platform

Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the Celeron 925 versus DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-12400F — the Core i5-12400F supports 260.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i5-12400F supports up to 128 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 3100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (Celeron 925) vs 2 (Core i5-12400F). PCIe lanes: 0 (Celeron 925) vs 20 (Core i5-12400F) — the Core i5-12400F offers 20 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: GL40,GM45 (Celeron 925) and H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-12400F).

Feature	Celeron 925	Core i5-12400F
Socket	—	LGA1700
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200+260%
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	128 GB+3100%
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	0	20

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: No (Celeron 925) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i5-12400F). Primary use case: Celeron 925 targets Budget, Core i5-12400F targets Gaming Performance/Value. Direct competitor: Celeron 925 rivals Pentium 4 2.80; Core i5-12400F rivals Ryzen 5 5600.

Feature	Celeron 925	Core i5-12400F
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	No	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	Budget	Gaming Performance/Value

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Celeron 925 was priced at $100, while the Core i5-12400F came in at $174. On launch pricing ($100 vs $174), Celeron 925 was $74 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron 925 delivers 5.3 pts/$ vs 112.3 pts/$ for the Core i5-12400F — making the Core i5-12400F the 182.1% better value option.

Feature	Celeron 925	Core i5-12400F
MSRP	$100-43%	$174
Performance per Dollar	5.3	112.3+2019%
Release Date	2011	2022

Search Celeron 925 on Amazon

Search Core i5-12400F on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.