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 i5-12400F

2022

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +7.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $715 less on MSRP ($174 MSRP vs $889 MSRP).
✅Delivers 387.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 112.3 vs 23.0 PassMark/$ ($174 MSRP vs $889 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 165W, a 100W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA2066 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (657 vs 9,361).

Core i9-9820X

2018

Why buy it

✅+1324.8% higher Geekbench multi-core.
✅120% more PCIe lanes (44 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-12400F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 23.0 vs 112.3 PassMark/$ ($889 MSRP vs $174 MSRP).
❌153.8% higher power demand at 165W vs 65W.
❌Older platform position on LGA2066 with DDR4, while Core i5-12400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-12400F.

Core i5-12400F

2022

Core i9-9820X

2018

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +7.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $715 less on MSRP ($174 MSRP vs $889 MSRP).
✅Delivers 387.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 112.3 vs 23.0 PassMark/$ ($174 MSRP vs $889 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 165W, a 100W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA2066 and DDR4.

Why buy it

✅+1324.8% higher Geekbench multi-core.
✅120% more PCIe lanes (44 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (657 vs 9,361).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-12400F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 23.0 vs 112.3 PassMark/$ ($889 MSRP vs $174 MSRP).
❌153.8% higher power demand at 165W vs 65W.
❌Older platform position on LGA2066 with DDR4, 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 i9-9820X?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, Core i5-12400F is ahead with a 7.9% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i9-9820X pulls ahead with 1324.8% better Geekbench multi-core.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i9-9820X is the better fit. You are getting 1324.8% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 10 cores and 20 threads.

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

Core i5-12400F is the smarter buy today. Core i5-12400F is $715 cheaper on MSRP at $174 MSRP versus $889 MSRP, and it gives you a 7.9% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that Core i9-9820X is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 1324.8% better Geekbench multi-core. It is also 387.8% better value on MSRP (112.3 vs 23.0 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

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

Core i5-12400F is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2022 vs 2018) and a healthier platform with LGA1700 and DDR5 instead of LGA2066. 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 i5-12400F Benchmark Check

Core i9-9820X Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-12400F	Core i9-9820X
1080p
low	183 FPS	176 FPS
medium	168 FPS	140 FPS
high	139 FPS	114 FPS
ultra	119 FPS	91 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	145 FPS
medium	132 FPS	114 FPS
high	106 FPS	91 FPS
ultra	89 FPS	72 FPS
4K
low	87 FPS	67 FPS
medium	81 FPS	56 FPS
high	64 FPS	44 FPS
ultra	49 FPS	35 FPS

Open Core i5-12400F Open Core i9-9820X

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-12400F	Core i9-9820X
1080p
low	471 FPS	327 FPS
medium	397 FPS	281 FPS
high	341 FPS	249 FPS
ultra	301 FPS	221 FPS
1440p
low	407 FPS	296 FPS
medium	351 FPS	259 FPS
high	309 FPS	228 FPS
ultra	265 FPS	198 FPS
4K
low	282 FPS	217 FPS
medium	248 FPS	194 FPS
high	229 FPS	179 FPS
ultra	196 FPS	156 FPS

Open Core i5-12400F Open Core i9-9820X

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-12400F	Core i9-9820X
1080p
low	488 FPS	511 FPS
medium	488 FPS	511 FPS
high	488 FPS	511 FPS
ultra	488 FPS	471 FPS
1440p
low	488 FPS	511 FPS
medium	488 FPS	482 FPS
high	485 FPS	423 FPS
ultra	434 FPS	367 FPS
4K
low	442 FPS	433 FPS
medium	389 FPS	340 FPS
high	337 FPS	298 FPS
ultra	274 FPS	239 FPS

Open Core i5-12400F Open Core i9-9820X

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-12400F	Core i9-9820X
1080p
low	488 FPS	511 FPS
medium	488 FPS	511 FPS
high	488 FPS	511 FPS
ultra	488 FPS	511 FPS
1440p
low	488 FPS	511 FPS
medium	488 FPS	511 FPS
high	488 FPS	511 FPS
ultra	473 FPS	502 FPS
4K
low	488 FPS	511 FPS
medium	450 FPS	480 FPS
high	391 FPS	426 FPS
ultra	330 FPS	367 FPS

Open Core i5-12400F Open Core i9-9820X

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-12400F and Core i9-9820X

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 i9-9820X

The Core i9-9820X is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 19 October 2018 (7 years ago). It is based on the Skylake (server) (2017−2018) architecture. It features 10 cores and 20 threads. Base frequency is 3.3 GHz, with boost up to 4.2 GHz. L3 cache: 16.5 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2066. Thermal design power (TDP): 165 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2666. Passmark benchmark score: 20,456 points. Launch price was $898.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-12400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core i9-9820X offers 10 cores / 20 threads — the Core i9-9820X has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.4 GHz on the Core i5-12400F versus 4.2 GHz on the Core i9-9820X — a 4.7% clock advantage for the Core i5-12400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 3.3 GHz). The Core i5-12400F uses the Alder Lake-S (2022) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Core i9-9820X uses Skylake (server) (2017−2018) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-12400F scores 19,532 against the Core i9-9820X's 20,456 — a 4.6% lead for the Core i9-9820X. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,700 vs 1,394, a 19.8% lead for the Core i5-12400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 657 vs 9,361 (173.8% advantage for the Core i9-9820X). L3 cache: 18 MB (total) on the Core i5-12400F vs 16.5 MB (total) on the Core i9-9820X.

Feature	Core i5-12400F	Core i9-9820X
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	10 / 20+67%
Boost Clock	4.4 GHz+5%	4.2 GHz
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	3.3 GHz+32%
L3 Cache	18 MB (total)+9%	16.5 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)+25%	1 MB (per core)
Process	Intel 7 nm-50%	14 nm
Architecture	Alder Lake-S (2022)	Skylake (server) (2017−2018)
PassMark	19,532	20,456+5%
Cinebench R23 Multi	12,380	—
Geekbench 6 Single	1,700+22%	1,394
Geekbench 6 Multi	657	9,361+1325%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-12400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i9-9820X uses LGA2066 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-12400F versus DDR4 2666 MHz on the Core i9-9820X — the Core i9-9820X supports 200% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 128 GB of RAM. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-12400F) vs 4 (Core i9-9820X). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-12400F) vs 44 (Core i9-9820X) — the Core i9-9820X offers 24 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-12400F) and Intel X299 (Core i9-9820X).

Feature	Core i5-12400F	Core i9-9820X
Socket	LGA1700	LGA2066
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200+25%	DDR4 2666 MHz
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	128 GB
RAM Channels	2	4+100%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	20	44+120%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i5-12400F) vs true (Core i9-9820X). Primary use case: Core i5-12400F targets Gaming Performance/Value, Core i9-9820X targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Core i5-12400F rivals Ryzen 5 5600.

Feature	Core i5-12400F	Core i9-9820X
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	—	Yes
AVX-512	—	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d, EPT	true
Target Use	Gaming Performance/Value	Workstation

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-12400F launched at $174 MSRP, while the Core i9-9820X debuted at $889. On MSRP ($174 vs $889), the Core i5-12400F is $715 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-12400F delivers 112.3 pts/$ vs 23.0 pts/$ for the Core i9-9820X — making the Core i5-12400F the 132% better value option.