
Core i5-12400F
Popular choices:

Core Ultra 5 235U
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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.
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
2022Why buy it
- ✅+12.3% higher PassMark.
- ✅+50% larger total L3 cache (18 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core Ultra 5 235U.
Trade-offs
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $174 MSRP, while Core Ultra 5 235U mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌364.3% higher power demand at 65W vs 14W.
Core Ultra 5 235U
2025Why buy it
- ✅Draws 14W instead of 65W, a 51W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (17,397 vs 19,532).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 18 MB).
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-12400F.
Core i5-12400F
2022Core Ultra 5 235U
2025Why buy it
- ✅+12.3% higher PassMark.
- ✅+50% larger total L3 cache (18 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core Ultra 5 235U.
Why buy it
- ✅Draws 14W instead of 65W, a 51W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $174 MSRP, while Core Ultra 5 235U mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌364.3% higher power demand at 65W vs 14W.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (17,397 vs 19,532).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 18 MB).
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-12400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Core Ultra 5 235U better than Core i5-12400F?
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?
Games Benchmarks
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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | Core Ultra 5 235U |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 183 FPS | 277 FPS |
| medium | 168 FPS | 248 FPS |
| high | 139 FPS | 210 FPS |
| ultra | 119 FPS | 181 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 230 FPS |
| medium | 132 FPS | 185 FPS |
| high | 106 FPS | 152 FPS |
| ultra | 89 FPS | 134 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 87 FPS | 161 FPS |
| medium | 81 FPS | 131 FPS |
| high | 64 FPS | 101 FPS |
| ultra | 49 FPS | 89 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | Core Ultra 5 235U |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 471 FPS | 416 FPS |
| medium | 397 FPS | 335 FPS |
| high | 341 FPS | 295 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 259 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 407 FPS | 354 FPS |
| medium | 351 FPS | 296 FPS |
| high | 309 FPS | 266 FPS |
| ultra | 265 FPS | 227 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 282 FPS | 276 FPS |
| medium | 248 FPS | 237 FPS |
| high | 229 FPS | 219 FPS |
| ultra | 196 FPS | 188 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | Core Ultra 5 235U |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 435 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 435 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 435 FPS |
| ultra | 488 FPS | 435 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 435 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 435 FPS |
| high | 485 FPS | 435 FPS |
| ultra | 434 FPS | 435 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 442 FPS | 435 FPS |
| medium | 389 FPS | 435 FPS |
| high | 337 FPS | 409 FPS |
| ultra | 274 FPS | 342 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | Core Ultra 5 235U |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 435 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 435 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 435 FPS |
| ultra | 488 FPS | 435 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 435 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 435 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 435 FPS |
| ultra | 473 FPS | 435 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 435 FPS |
| medium | 450 FPS | 435 FPS |
| high | 391 FPS | 435 FPS |
| ultra | 330 FPS | 410 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-12400F and Core Ultra 5 235U

Core i5-12400F
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 Ultra 5 235U
Core Ultra 5 235U
The Core Ultra 5 235U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Arrow Lake-U (2025) architecture. It features 12 cores and 14 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 4.9 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB. Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2049. Thermal design power (TDP): 14 MB + 12 MB. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 17,397 points. Launch price was $299.
Processing Power
The Core i5-12400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 235U offers 12 cores / 14 threads — the Core Ultra 5 235U has 6 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.4 GHz on the Core i5-12400F versus 4.9 GHz on the Core Ultra 5 235U — a 10.8% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 5 235U (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The Core i5-12400F uses the Alder Lake-S (2022) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Core Ultra 5 235U uses Arrow Lake-U (2025) (5 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-12400F scores 19,532 against the Core Ultra 5 235U's 17,397 — a 11.6% lead for the Core i5-12400F. L3 cache: 18 MB (total) on the Core i5-12400F vs 12 MB on the Core Ultra 5 235U.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | Core Ultra 5 235U |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 12 / 14+100% |
| Boost Clock | 4.4 GHz | 4.9 GHz+11% |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz+4% | 2.4 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 18 MB (total)+50% | 12 MB |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | — |
| Process | Intel 7 nm | 5 nm-29% |
| Architecture | Alder Lake-S (2022) | Arrow Lake-U (2025) |
| PassMark | 19,532+12% | 17,397 |
| 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 Ultra 5 235U uses FCBGA2049 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | Core Ultra 5 235U |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | FCBGA2049 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 5.0+67% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 2 | — |
| ECC Support | No | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | — |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i5-12400F) / not specified (Core Ultra 5 235U). Primary use case: Core i5-12400F targets Gaming Performance/Value. Direct competitor: Core i5-12400F rivals Ryzen 5 5600.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | Core Ultra 5 235U |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | — |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d, EPT | — |
| Target Use | Gaming Performance/Value | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












