
Core i5-12400F
Popular choices:

Core Ultra 9 275HX
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
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core Ultra 9 275HX.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 9 275HX across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (657 vs 17,908).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (18 MB vs 36 MB).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $174 MSRP, while Core Ultra 9 275HX mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
Core Ultra 9 275HX
2025Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +39.2% higher average FPS across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+100% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 18 MB).
- ✅Draws 55W instead of 65W, a 10W reduction.
- ✅20% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc Graphics, while Core i5-12400F needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-12400F.
Core i5-12400F
2022Core Ultra 9 275HX
2025Why buy it
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core Ultra 9 275HX.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +39.2% higher average FPS across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+100% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 18 MB).
- ✅Draws 55W instead of 65W, a 10W reduction.
- ✅20% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc Graphics, while Core i5-12400F needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 9 275HX across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (657 vs 17,908).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (18 MB vs 36 MB).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $174 MSRP, while Core Ultra 9 275HX mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
Trade-offs
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-12400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Core Ultra 9 275HX better than Core i5-12400F?
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?
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 9 275HX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 183 FPS | 309 FPS |
| medium | 168 FPS | 299 FPS |
| high | 139 FPS | 246 FPS |
| ultra | 119 FPS | 208 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 269 FPS |
| medium | 132 FPS | 228 FPS |
| high | 106 FPS | 175 FPS |
| ultra | 89 FPS | 154 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 87 FPS | 179 FPS |
| medium | 81 FPS | 151 FPS |
| high | 64 FPS | 112 FPS |
| ultra | 49 FPS | 101 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | Core Ultra 9 275HX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 471 FPS | 802 FPS |
| medium | 397 FPS | 700 FPS |
| high | 341 FPS | 565 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 495 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 407 FPS | 682 FPS |
| medium | 351 FPS | 614 FPS |
| high | 309 FPS | 505 FPS |
| ultra | 265 FPS | 408 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 282 FPS | 382 FPS |
| medium | 248 FPS | 349 FPS |
| high | 229 FPS | 326 FPS |
| ultra | 196 FPS | 283 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | Core Ultra 9 275HX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 866 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 708 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 628 FPS |
| ultra | 488 FPS | 537 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 744 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 611 FPS |
| high | 485 FPS | 529 FPS |
| ultra | 434 FPS | 453 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 442 FPS | 527 FPS |
| medium | 389 FPS | 446 FPS |
| high | 337 FPS | 403 FPS |
| ultra | 274 FPS | 344 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | Core Ultra 9 275HX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 1078 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 959 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 841 FPS |
| ultra | 488 FPS | 757 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 862 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 756 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 660 FPS |
| ultra | 473 FPS | 585 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 635 FPS |
| medium | 450 FPS | 565 FPS |
| high | 391 FPS | 500 FPS |
| ultra | 330 FPS | 437 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-12400F and Core Ultra 9 275HX

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 9 275HX
Core Ultra 9 275HX
The Core Ultra 9 275HX is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2025-01-01. It is based on the Arrow Lake-HX (2025) architecture. It features 24 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 5.4 GHz. L3 cache: 36 MB (total). L2 cache: 3 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2114. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 56,018 points. Launch price was $600.
Processing Power
The Core i5-12400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core Ultra 9 275HX offers 24 cores / 24 threads — the Core Ultra 9 275HX has 18 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.4 GHz on the Core i5-12400F versus 5.4 GHz on the Core Ultra 9 275HX — a 20.4% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 9 275HX (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2.7 GHz). The Core i5-12400F uses the Alder Lake-S (2022) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Core Ultra 9 275HX uses Arrow Lake-HX (2025) (3 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-12400F scores 19,532 against the Core Ultra 9 275HX's 56,018 — a 96.6% lead for the Core Ultra 9 275HX. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,700 vs 2,835, a 50.1% lead for the Core Ultra 9 275HX that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 657 vs 17,908 (185.8% advantage for the Core Ultra 9 275HX). L3 cache: 18 MB (total) on the Core i5-12400F vs 36 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 9 275HX.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | Core Ultra 9 275HX |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 24 / 24+300% |
| Boost Clock | 4.4 GHz | 5.4 GHz+23% |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz | 2.7 GHz+8% |
| L3 Cache | 18 MB (total) | 36 MB (total)+100% |
| 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-HX (2025) |
| PassMark | 19,532 | 56,018+187% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 12,380 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,700 | 2,835+67% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 657 | 17,908+2626% |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-12400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core Ultra 9 275HX uses FCBGA2114 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 memory speed. The Core Ultra 9 275HX supports up to 256 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-12400F) vs 24 (Core Ultra 9 275HX) — the Core Ultra 9 275HX offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-12400F) and HM870,WM880 (Core Ultra 9 275HX).
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | Core Ultra 9 275HX |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | FCBGA2114 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 5.0+67% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 | DDR5-6400 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB | 256 GB+100% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | No | No |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | 24+20% |
Advanced Features
Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i5-12400F) vs VT-x, VT-d (Core Ultra 9 275HX). The Core Ultra 9 275HX includes integrated graphics (Intel Arc Graphics), while the Core i5-12400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-12400F targets Gaming Performance/Value, Core Ultra 9 275HX targets High-End Gaming Laptop. Direct competitor: Core i5-12400F rivals Ryzen 5 5600; Core Ultra 9 275HX rivals Ryzen 9 9955HX.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | Core Ultra 9 275HX |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Intel Arc Graphics |
| Unlocked | — | Yes |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d, EPT | VT-x, VT-d |
| Target Use | Gaming Performance/Value | High-End Gaming Laptop |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












