
Core i5-12400F
Popular choices:

Core Ultra 9 285H
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 285H.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 9 285H across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (12,380 vs 26,500).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (18 MB vs 24 MB).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $174 MSRP, while Core Ultra 9 285H mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌44.4% higher power demand at 65W vs 45W.
Core Ultra 9 285H
2025Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +42.4% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (24 MB vs 18 MB).
- ✅Draws 45W instead of 65W, a 20W reduction.
- ✅40% more PCIe lanes (28 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc 140T (8 Xe-cores), while Core i5-12400F needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-12400F.
Core i5-12400F
2022Core Ultra 9 285H
2025Why buy it
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core Ultra 9 285H.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +42.4% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (24 MB vs 18 MB).
- ✅Draws 45W instead of 65W, a 20W reduction.
- ✅40% more PCIe lanes (28 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc 140T (8 Xe-cores), while Core i5-12400F needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 9 285H across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (12,380 vs 26,500).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (18 MB vs 24 MB).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $174 MSRP, while Core Ultra 9 285H mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌44.4% higher power demand at 65W vs 45W.
Trade-offs
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-12400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Core Ultra 9 285H 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 285H |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 183 FPS | 300 FPS |
| medium | 168 FPS | 274 FPS |
| high | 139 FPS | 229 FPS |
| ultra | 119 FPS | 195 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 244 FPS |
| medium | 132 FPS | 199 FPS |
| high | 106 FPS | 161 FPS |
| ultra | 89 FPS | 140 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 87 FPS | 169 FPS |
| medium | 81 FPS | 138 FPS |
| high | 64 FPS | 106 FPS |
| ultra | 49 FPS | 93 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | Core Ultra 9 285H |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 471 FPS | 749 FPS |
| medium | 397 FPS | 602 FPS |
| high | 341 FPS | 496 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 440 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 407 FPS | 650 FPS |
| medium | 351 FPS | 544 FPS |
| high | 309 FPS | 449 FPS |
| ultra | 265 FPS | 376 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 282 FPS | 383 FPS |
| medium | 248 FPS | 328 FPS |
| high | 229 FPS | 303 FPS |
| ultra | 196 FPS | 260 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | Core Ultra 9 285H |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 858 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 826 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 717 FPS |
| ultra | 488 FPS | 611 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 858 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 684 FPS |
| high | 485 FPS | 591 FPS |
| ultra | 434 FPS | 506 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 442 FPS | 599 FPS |
| medium | 389 FPS | 497 FPS |
| high | 337 FPS | 449 FPS |
| ultra | 274 FPS | 380 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | Core Ultra 9 285H |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 858 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 858 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 839 FPS |
| ultra | 488 FPS | 742 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 858 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 780 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 680 FPS |
| ultra | 473 FPS | 587 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 594 FPS |
| medium | 450 FPS | 529 FPS |
| high | 391 FPS | 477 FPS |
| ultra | 330 FPS | 416 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-12400F and Core Ultra 9 285H

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 285H
Core Ultra 9 285H
The Core Ultra 9 285H is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 13 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Arrow Lake-H (2025) architecture. It features 16 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 2.9 GHz, with boost up to 5.4 GHz. L3 cache: 24 MB (total). L2 cache: 3 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2049. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 34,327 points. Launch price was $651.
Processing Power
The Core i5-12400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core Ultra 9 285H offers 16 cores / 16 threads — the Core Ultra 9 285H has 10 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.4 GHz on the Core i5-12400F versus 5.4 GHz on the Core Ultra 9 285H — a 20.4% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 9 285H (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2.9 GHz). The Core i5-12400F uses the Alder Lake-S (2022) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Core Ultra 9 285H uses Arrow Lake-H (2025) (3 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-12400F scores 19,532 against the Core Ultra 9 285H's 34,327 — a 54.9% lead for the Core Ultra 9 285H. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 12,380 vs 26,500 (72.6% advantage for the Core Ultra 9 285H). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,700 vs 2,720, a 46.2% lead for the Core Ultra 9 285H that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 657 vs 15,330 (183.6% advantage for the Core Ultra 9 285H). L3 cache: 18 MB (total) on the Core i5-12400F vs 24 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 9 285H.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | Core Ultra 9 285H |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 16 / 16+167% |
| Boost Clock | 4.4 GHz | 5.4 GHz+23% |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz | 2.9 GHz+16% |
| L3 Cache | 18 MB (total) | 24 MB (total)+33% |
| 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-H (2025) |
| PassMark | 19,532 | 34,327+76% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 12,380 | 26,500+114% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,700 | 2,720+60% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 657 | 15,330+2233% |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-12400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core Ultra 9 285H uses FCBGA2049 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 memory speed. The Core Ultra 9 285H 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 28 (Core Ultra 9 285H) — the Core Ultra 9 285H offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-12400F) and SoC (Core Ultra 9 285H).
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | Core Ultra 9 285H |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | FCBGA2049 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 5.0+67% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 | LPDDR5x-8400, DDR5-6400 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB | 192 GB+50% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | 28+40% |
Advanced Features
Both support VT-x, VT-d, EPT virtualization. The Core Ultra 9 285H includes integrated graphics (Intel Arc 140T (8 Xe-cores)), while the Core i5-12400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-12400F targets Gaming Performance/Value, Core Ultra 9 285H targets High-end Mobile Workstation. Direct competitor: Core i5-12400F rivals Ryzen 5 5600; Core Ultra 9 285H rivals Ryzen AI 9 HX 375.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | Core Ultra 9 285H |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Intel Arc 140T (8 Xe-cores) |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d, EPT | VT-x, VT-d, EPT |
| Target Use | Gaming Performance/Value | High-end Mobile Workstation |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












