
Core i5-12400F

Core i7-920XM
Core i5-12400F vs Core i7-920XM Performance Spectrum
About PassMark
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.
Core i5-12400F vs Core i7-920XM 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.

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Valorant

Among Us

Apex Legends

ARC Raiders

Baldur's Gate 3

Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
Core i5-12400F vs Core i7-920XM: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
Core i5-12400F
2022Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +322.3% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+125% larger total L3 cache (18 MB vs 8 MB).
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of PGA988 and older memory support.
- ✅25% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i7-920XM.
Trade-offs
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $174 MSRP, while Core i7-920XM mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
Core i7-920XM
2009Why buy it
- ✅Draws 55W instead of 65W, a 10W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-12400F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (2,014 vs 19,532).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 18 MB).
- ❌Older platform position on PGA988, while Core i5-12400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-12400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i5-12400F better than Core i7-920XM?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Core i5-12400F vs Core i7-920XM Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

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.

Core i7-920XM
The Core i7-920XM is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 23 September 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Clarksfield (2009−2010) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333. Passmark benchmark score: 2,014 points. Launch price was $1,054.
Processing Power
The Core i5-12400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core i7-920XM offers 4 cores / 8 threads — the Core i5-12400F has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.4 GHz on the Core i5-12400F versus 3.2 GHz on the Core i7-920XM — a 31.6% clock advantage for the Core i5-12400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2 GHz). The Core i5-12400F uses the Alder Lake-S (2022) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Core i7-920XM uses Clarksfield (2009−2010) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-12400F scores 19,532 against the Core i7-920XM's 2,014 — a 162.6% lead for the Core i5-12400F. L3 cache: 18 MB (total) on the Core i5-12400F vs 8 MB (total) on the Core i7-920XM.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | Core i7-920XM |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12+50% | 4 / 8 |
| Boost Clock | 4.4 GHz+38% | 3.2 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz+25% | 2 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 18 MB (total)+125% | 8 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core)+400% | 256 kB (per core) |
| Process | Intel 7 nm-84% | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Alder Lake-S (2022) | Clarksfield (2009−2010) |
| PassMark | 19,532+870% | 2,014 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 12,380 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,700 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 657 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-12400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i7-920XM uses PGA988 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-12400F versus 1333 on the Core i7-920XM — 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 8 GB — 1500% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-12400F) vs 16 (Core i7-920XM) — the Core i5-12400F offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-12400F) and PM55,HM55,QM57 (Core i7-920XM).
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | Core i7-920XM |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | PGA988 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0+50% | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200+260% | 1333 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB+1500% | 8 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | No | No |
| PCIe Lanes | 20+25% | 16 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i5-12400F) vs true (Core i7-920XM). Primary use case: Core i5-12400F targets Gaming Performance/Value. Direct competitor: Core i5-12400F rivals Ryzen 5 5600; Core i7-920XM rivals Core i7-2720QM.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | Core i7-920XM |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | — | None |
| Unlocked | — | Yes |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d, EPT | true |
| Target Use | Gaming Performance/Value | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













