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.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Why buy it

✅Costs $446 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $606 MSRP).
✅Delivers 49.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 54.5 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $606 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-12900HX across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,191 vs 23,150).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 30 MB).
❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core i9-12900HX moves to FCBGA1964 and DDR5.

Core i9-12900HX

2022

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +61.2% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+150% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Draws 55W instead of 65W, a 10W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA1964 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
✅200% more PCIe lanes (48 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 54.5 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($606 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).

Core i5-10400F

2020

Core i9-12900HX

2022

Why buy it

✅Costs $446 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $606 MSRP).
✅Delivers 49.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 54.5 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $606 MSRP).

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +61.2% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+150% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Draws 55W instead of 65W, a 10W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA1964 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.
✅200% more PCIe lanes (48 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-12900HX across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,191 vs 23,150).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 30 MB).
❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core i9-12900HX moves to FCBGA1964 and DDR5.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 54.5 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($606 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is Core i9-12900HX better than Core i5-10400F?

Yes. Core i9-12900HX is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 61.2% average FPS lead across 3 shared CPU game tests in our data, 182.6% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, 153.4% higher PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i9-12900HX is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 61.2% more average FPS across 3 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i9-12900HX is the better fit. You are getting 182.6% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 16 cores and 24 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 150% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 12 MB).

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

Core i9-12900HX is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-10400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Core i9-12900HX is 278.8% more expensive on MSRP at $606 MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you a 61.2% average FPS lead across 3 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-10400F is also 49.5% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 54.5 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

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

Core i9-12900HX is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2022 vs 2020), a healthier platform with FCBGA1964 and DDR5 instead of LGA1200, 150% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 12 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 16 cores / 24 threads instead of 6/12. That should give you a better long-term upgrade path for motherboard, RAM, and future CPU swaps.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Core i5-10400F Benchmark Check

Core i9-12900HX Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-12900HX
1080p
low	192 FPS	269 FPS
medium	152 FPS	259 FPS
high	123 FPS	214 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	184 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	230 FPS
medium	119 FPS	198 FPS
high	97 FPS	159 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	140 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	159 FPS
medium	70 FPS	136 FPS
high	55 FPS	106 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	93 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i9-12900HX

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-12900HX
1080p
low	326 FPS	611 FPS
medium	318 FPS	523 FPS
high	290 FPS	439 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	397 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	527 FPS
medium	292 FPS	470 FPS
high	267 FPS	397 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	340 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	310 FPS
medium	258 FPS	281 FPS
high	235 FPS	266 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	232 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i9-12900HX

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-12900HX
1080p
low	326 FPS	775 FPS
medium	326 FPS	616 FPS
high	326 FPS	545 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	462 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	692 FPS
medium	326 FPS	554 FPS
high	326 FPS	485 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	416 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	498 FPS
medium	326 FPS	416 FPS
high	289 FPS	373 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	314 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i9-12900HX

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-12900HX
1080p
low	326 FPS	825 FPS
medium	326 FPS	783 FPS
high	326 FPS	676 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	600 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	744 FPS
medium	326 FPS	659 FPS
high	326 FPS	569 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	496 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	523 FPS
medium	326 FPS	474 FPS
high	326 FPS	421 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	366 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Core i9-12900HX

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Core i9-12900HX

Core i5-10400F

The Core i5-10400F is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 April 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 2.9 GHz, with boost up to 4.3 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1200. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 13,029 points. Launch price was $155.

Core i9-12900HX

The Core i9-12900HX is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 10 May 2022 (3 years ago). It is based on the Alder Lake-HX (2022) architecture. It features 16 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 2.3 GHz, with boost up to 5 GHz. L3 cache: 30 MB (total). L2 cache: 1.25 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1964. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR4, DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 33,018 points. Launch price was $499.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core i9-12900HX offers 16 cores / 24 threads — the Core i9-12900HX has 10 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 5 GHz on the Core i9-12900HX — a 15.1% clock advantage for the Core i9-12900HX (base: 2.9 GHz vs 2.3 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i9-12900HX uses Alder Lake-HX (2022) (Intel 7 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Core i9-12900HX's 33,018 — a 86.8% lead for the Core i9-12900HX. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 8,191 vs 23,150 (95.5% advantage for the Core i9-12900HX). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 2,426, a 50.1% lead for the Core i9-12900HX that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 5,783 vs 14,620 (86.6% advantage for the Core i9-12900HX). L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 30 MB (total) on the Core i9-12900HX.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-12900HX
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	16 / 24+167%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz	5 GHz+16%
Base Clock	2.9 GHz+26%	2.3 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	30 MB (total)+150%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	1.25 MB (per core)+400%
Process	14 nm	Intel 7 nm-50%
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Alder Lake-HX (2022)
PassMark	13,029	33,018+153%
Cinebench R23 Multi	8,191	23,150+183%
Geekbench 6 Single	1,454	2,426+67%
Geekbench 6 Multi	5,783	14,620+153%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i9-12900HX uses FCBGA1964 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i5-10400F versus DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i9-12900HX — the Core i9-12900HX supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 128 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 48 (Core i9-12900HX) — the Core i9-12900HX offers 32 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and HM670,WM690 (Core i9-12900HX).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-12900HX
Socket	LGA1200	FCBGA1964
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 5.0+67%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200+25%
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	128 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	48+200%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Core i9-12900HX has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i9-12900HX). The Core i9-12900HX includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 770), while the Core i5-10400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming, Core i9-12900HX targets High-end Mobile Performance. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; Core i9-12900HX rivals Ryzen 9 6900HX.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-12900HX
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	UHD Graphics 770
Unlocked	No	Yes
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	Gaming	High-end Mobile Performance

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Core i9-12900HX debuted at $606. On MSRP ($160 vs $606), the Core i5-10400F is $446 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 54.5 pts/$ for the Core i9-12900HX — making the Core i5-10400F the 39.7% better value option.