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

✅Costs $210 less on MSRP ($174 MSRP vs $384 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core Ultra 7 265T.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 7 265T across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (12,380 vs 34,000).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (18 MB vs 30 MB).
❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 7 265T can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core Ultra 7 265T

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +17.7% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+66.7% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 18 MB).
✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.
✅20% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Graphics (Xe-LPG 4-core), while Core i5-12400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌
120.7% HIGHER MSRP
$384 MSRPvs$174 MSRP
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-12400F.

Core i5-12400F

2022

Core Ultra 7 265T

2025

Why buy it

✅Costs $210 less on MSRP ($174 MSRP vs $384 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core Ultra 7 265T.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +17.7% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+66.7% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 18 MB).
✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.
✅20% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Graphics (Xe-LPG 4-core), while Core i5-12400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 7 265T across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (12,380 vs 34,000).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (18 MB vs 30 MB).
❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 7 265T can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌
120.7% HIGHER MSRP
$384 MSRPvs$174 MSRP
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-12400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 7 265T better than Core i5-12400F?

Yes. Core Ultra 7 265T is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 17.7% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data, 174.6% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, 108.3% 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 Ultra 7 265T is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 17.7% more average FPS across 4 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core Ultra 7 265T is the better fit. You are getting 174.6% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 20 cores and 20 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 66.7% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 18 MB).

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

Core Ultra 7 265T is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-12400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Core Ultra 7 265T is 120.7% more expensive on MSRP at $384 MSRP versus $174 MSRP, and it gives you a 17.7% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-12400F is also 6.0% better value on MSRP (112.3 vs 105.9 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper. That said, if you already own a compatible LGA1700 + DDR5 setup, Core i5-12400F 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 Ultra 7 265T is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2022), 66.7% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 18 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 20 cores / 20 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 i5-12400F Benchmark Check

Core Ultra 7 265T Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-12400F	Core Ultra 7 265T
1080p
low	183 FPS	280 FPS
medium	168 FPS	273 FPS
high	139 FPS	227 FPS
ultra	119 FPS	191 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	226 FPS
medium	132 FPS	194 FPS
high	106 FPS	155 FPS
ultra	89 FPS	135 FPS
4K
low	87 FPS	151 FPS
medium	81 FPS	129 FPS
high	64 FPS	99 FPS
ultra	49 FPS	87 FPS

Open Core i5-12400F Open Core Ultra 7 265T

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-12400F	Core Ultra 7 265T
1080p
low	471 FPS	375 FPS
medium	397 FPS	321 FPS
high	341 FPS	271 FPS
ultra	301 FPS	243 FPS
1440p
low	407 FPS	326 FPS
medium	351 FPS	290 FPS
high	309 FPS	246 FPS
ultra	265 FPS	208 FPS
4K
low	282 FPS	192 FPS
medium	248 FPS	175 FPS
high	229 FPS	167 FPS
ultra	196 FPS	145 FPS

Open Core i5-12400F Open Core Ultra 7 265T

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-12400F	Core Ultra 7 265T
1080p
low	488 FPS	817 FPS
medium	488 FPS	667 FPS
high	488 FPS	594 FPS
ultra	488 FPS	509 FPS
1440p
low	488 FPS	705 FPS
medium	488 FPS	579 FPS
high	485 FPS	503 FPS
ultra	434 FPS	428 FPS
4K
low	442 FPS	500 FPS
medium	389 FPS	422 FPS
high	337 FPS	383 FPS
ultra	274 FPS	327 FPS

Open Core i5-12400F Open Core Ultra 7 265T

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-12400F	Core Ultra 7 265T
1080p
low	488 FPS	989 FPS
medium	488 FPS	894 FPS
high	488 FPS	773 FPS
ultra	488 FPS	700 FPS
1440p
low	488 FPS	810 FPS
medium	488 FPS	718 FPS
high	488 FPS	619 FPS
ultra	473 FPS	548 FPS
4K
low	488 FPS	553 FPS
medium	450 FPS	498 FPS
high	391 FPS	445 FPS
ultra	330 FPS	392 FPS

Open Core i5-12400F Open Core Ultra 7 265T

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-12400F and Core Ultra 7 265T

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 7 265T

The Core Ultra 7 265T is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 7 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) architecture. It features 20 cores and 20 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 5.3 GHz. L3 cache: 30 MB (total). L2 cache: 3 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1851. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 40,681 points. Launch price was $384.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-12400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 265T offers 20 cores / 20 threads — the Core Ultra 7 265T has 14 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.4 GHz on the Core i5-12400F versus 5.3 GHz on the Core Ultra 7 265T — a 18.6% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 7 265T (base: 2.5 GHz vs 1.5 GHz). The Core i5-12400F uses the Alder Lake-S (2022) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Core Ultra 7 265T uses Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) (3 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-12400F scores 19,532 against the Core Ultra 7 265T's 40,681 — a 70.2% lead for the Core Ultra 7 265T. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 12,380 vs 34,000 (93.2% advantage for the Core Ultra 7 265T). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,700 vs 2,954, a 53.9% lead for the Core Ultra 7 265T that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 657 vs 16,455 (184.6% advantage for the Core Ultra 7 265T). L3 cache: 18 MB (total) on the Core i5-12400F vs 30 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 7 265T.

Feature	Core i5-12400F	Core Ultra 7 265T
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	20 / 20+233%
Boost Clock	4.4 GHz	5.3 GHz+20%
Base Clock	2.5 GHz+67%	1.5 GHz
L3 Cache	18 MB (total)	30 MB (total)+67%
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)	3 MB (per core)+140%
Process	Intel 7 nm	3 nm-57%
Architecture	Alder Lake-S (2022)	Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)
PassMark	19,532	40,681+108%
Cinebench R23 Multi	12,380	34,000+175%
Geekbench 6 Single	1,700	2,954+74%
Geekbench 6 Multi	657	16,455+2405%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-12400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core Ultra 7 265T uses LGA1851 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 memory speed. The Core Ultra 7 265T supports up to 192 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 40% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-12400F) vs 24 (Core Ultra 7 265T) — the Core Ultra 7 265T offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-12400F) and Z890,H870,B860 (Core Ultra 7 265T).

Feature	Core i5-12400F	Core Ultra 7 265T
Socket	LGA1700	LGA1851
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 5.0+67%
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200	DDR5-6400
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	192 GB+50%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	24+20%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i5-12400F) vs VT-x, VT-d (Core Ultra 7 265T). The Core Ultra 7 265T includes integrated graphics (Intel Graphics (Xe-LPG 4-core)), while the Core i5-12400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-12400F targets Gaming Performance/Value, Core Ultra 7 265T targets High End Desktop. Direct competitor: Core i5-12400F rivals Ryzen 5 5600.

Feature	Core i5-12400F	Core Ultra 7 265T
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	Intel Graphics (Xe-LPG 4-core)
Unlocked	—	Yes
AVX-512	—	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d, EPT	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	Gaming Performance/Value	High End Desktop

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-12400F launched at $174 MSRP, while the Core Ultra 7 265T debuted at $384. On MSRP ($174 vs $384), the Core i5-12400F is $210 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-12400F delivers 112.3 pts/$ vs 105.9 pts/$ for the Core Ultra 7 265T — making the Core i5-12400F the 5.8% better value option.