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 $334 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $494 MSRP).
✅Delivers 75.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 46.3 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $494 MSRP).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i9-12900TE.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-12900TE across 21 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 22,887).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 30 MB).
❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core i9-12900TE moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.

Core i9-12900TE

2022

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +33.3% higher average FPS across 21 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+150% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 46.3 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($494 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Core i9-12900TE

2022

Why buy it

✅Costs $334 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $494 MSRP).
✅Delivers 75.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 46.3 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $494 MSRP).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i9-12900TE.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +33.3% higher average FPS across 21 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+150% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-12900TE across 21 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (13,029 vs 22,887).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 30 MB).
❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core i9-12900TE moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 46.3 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($494 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

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

Yes. Core i9-12900TE is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 33.3% average FPS lead across 21 shared CPU game tests in our data, 75.7% better 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 i9-12900TE is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 33.3% more average FPS across 21 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i9-12900TE is the better fit. You are getting 75.7% better PassMark, 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 i9-12900TE is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-10400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Core i9-12900TE is 208.8% more expensive on MSRP at $494 MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you a 33.3% average FPS lead across 21 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-10400F is also 75.8% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 46.3 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper. That said, if you already own a compatible LGA1200 + DDR4 setup, Core i5-10400F can still make sense as a platform-matched option because it avoids a motherboard and RAM swap.

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

Core i9-12900TE is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2022 vs 2020), a healthier platform with LGA1700 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 i9-12900TE Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-12900TE
1080p
low	192 FPS	254 FPS
medium	152 FPS	239 FPS
high	123 FPS	201 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	172 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	220 FPS
medium	119 FPS	187 FPS
high	97 FPS	153 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	135 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	151 FPS
medium	70 FPS	128 FPS
high	55 FPS	100 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	87 FPS

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

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-12900TE
1080p
low	326 FPS	330 FPS
medium	318 FPS	281 FPS
high	290 FPS	235 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	211 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	273 FPS
medium	292 FPS	242 FPS
high	267 FPS	209 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	178 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	169 FPS
medium	258 FPS	151 FPS
high	235 FPS	142 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	123 FPS

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

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-12900TE
1080p
low	326 FPS	572 FPS
medium	326 FPS	572 FPS
high	326 FPS	572 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	572 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	572 FPS
medium	326 FPS	572 FPS
high	326 FPS	572 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	572 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	572 FPS
medium	326 FPS	495 FPS
high	289 FPS	440 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	370 FPS

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

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-12900TE
1080p
low	326 FPS	572 FPS
medium	326 FPS	572 FPS
high	326 FPS	572 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	572 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	572 FPS
medium	326 FPS	572 FPS
high	326 FPS	572 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	572 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	572 FPS
medium	326 FPS	572 FPS
high	326 FPS	511 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	433 FPS

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

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

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

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 i9-12900TE

The Core i9-12900TE 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 16 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 1.1 GHz, with boost up to 4.8 GHz. L3 cache: 30 MB (total). L2 cache: 1.25 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR4, DDR5 Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 22,887 points. Launch price was $299.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core i9-12900TE offers 16 cores / 24 threads — the Core i9-12900TE has 10 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 4.8 GHz on the Core i9-12900TE — a 11% clock advantage for the Core i9-12900TE (base: 2.9 GHz vs 1.1 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i9-12900TE uses Alder Lake-S (2022) (10 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Core i9-12900TE's 22,887 — a 54.9% lead for the Core i9-12900TE. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 30 MB (total) on the Core i9-12900TE.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-12900TE
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	16 / 24+167%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz	4.8 GHz+12%
Base Clock	2.9 GHz+164%	1.1 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	30 MB (total)+150%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	1.25 MB (per core)+400%
Process	14 nm	10 nm-29%
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Alder Lake-S (2022)
PassMark	13,029	22,887+76%
Cinebench R23 Multi	8,191	—
Geekbench 6 Single	1,454	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	5,783	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i9-12900TE uses LGA1700 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-12900TE
Socket	LGA1200	LGA1700
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 5.0+67%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	—
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) / not specified (Core i9-12900TE). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Core i9-12900TE
Integrated GPU	No	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	—
Target Use	Gaming	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Core i9-12900TE debuted at $494. On MSRP ($160 vs $494), the Core i5-10400F is $334 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 46.3 pts/$ for the Core i9-12900TE — making the Core i5-10400F the 54.9% better value option.