
Core i5-12400F
Popular choices:

EPYC 8324P
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
- ✅Costs $1,721 less on MSRP ($174 MSRP vs $1,895 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 272.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 112.3 vs 30.1 PassMark/$ ($174 MSRP vs $1,895 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 180W, a 115W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 8324P.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 8324P across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (19,532 vs 57,127).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 8324P, which brings 32 cores / 64 threads and 96 PCIe lanes.
EPYC 8324P
2023Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +7.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 32 cores / 64 threads, plus 96 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅380% more PCIe lanes (96 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 30.1 vs 112.3 PassMark/$ ($1,895 MSRP vs $174 MSRP).
- ❌176.9% higher power demand at 180W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-12400F.
Core i5-12400F
2022EPYC 8324P
2023Why buy it
- ✅Costs $1,721 less on MSRP ($174 MSRP vs $1,895 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 272.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 112.3 vs 30.1 PassMark/$ ($174 MSRP vs $1,895 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 180W, a 115W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 8324P.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +7.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 32 cores / 64 threads, plus 96 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅380% more PCIe lanes (96 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 8324P across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (19,532 vs 57,127).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 8324P, which brings 32 cores / 64 threads and 96 PCIe lanes.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 30.1 vs 112.3 PassMark/$ ($1,895 MSRP vs $174 MSRP).
- ❌176.9% higher power demand at 180W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-12400F.
Quick Answers
So, is EPYC 8324P 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 | EPYC 8324P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 183 FPS | 159 FPS |
| medium | 168 FPS | 131 FPS |
| high | 139 FPS | 110 FPS |
| ultra | 119 FPS | 87 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 142 FPS |
| medium | 132 FPS | 114 FPS |
| high | 106 FPS | 90 FPS |
| ultra | 89 FPS | 72 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 87 FPS | 68 FPS |
| medium | 81 FPS | 58 FPS |
| high | 64 FPS | 45 FPS |
| ultra | 49 FPS | 37 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 8324P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 471 FPS | 419 FPS |
| medium | 397 FPS | 369 FPS |
| high | 341 FPS | 300 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 236 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 407 FPS | 344 FPS |
| medium | 351 FPS | 311 FPS |
| high | 309 FPS | 260 FPS |
| ultra | 265 FPS | 199 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 282 FPS | 212 FPS |
| medium | 248 FPS | 195 FPS |
| high | 229 FPS | 164 FPS |
| ultra | 196 FPS | 132 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 8324P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 860 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 786 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 760 FPS |
| ultra | 488 FPS | 682 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 664 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 587 FPS |
| high | 485 FPS | 559 FPS |
| ultra | 434 FPS | 498 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 442 FPS | 436 FPS |
| medium | 389 FPS | 345 FPS |
| high | 337 FPS | 308 FPS |
| ultra | 274 FPS | 251 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 8324P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 1022 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 913 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 771 FPS |
| ultra | 488 FPS | 650 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 832 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 712 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 598 FPS |
| ultra | 473 FPS | 490 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 599 FPS |
| medium | 450 FPS | 523 FPS |
| high | 391 FPS | 451 FPS |
| ultra | 330 FPS | 375 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-12400F and EPYC 8324P

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.

EPYC 8324P
EPYC 8324P
The EPYC 8324P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 18 September 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Siena (2023−2024) architecture. It features 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 2.65 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 128 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: SP6. Thermal design power (TDP): 180 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 57,127 points. Launch price was $1,895.
Processing Power
The Core i5-12400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the EPYC 8324P offers 32 cores / 64 threads — the EPYC 8324P has 26 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.4 GHz on the Core i5-12400F versus 3 GHz on the EPYC 8324P — a 37.8% clock advantage for the Core i5-12400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2.65 GHz). The Core i5-12400F uses the Alder Lake-S (2022) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the EPYC 8324P uses Siena (2023−2024) (5 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-12400F scores 19,532 against the EPYC 8324P's 57,127 — a 98.1% lead for the EPYC 8324P. L3 cache: 18 MB (total) on the Core i5-12400F vs 128 MB (total) on the EPYC 8324P.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 8324P |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 32 / 64+433% |
| Boost Clock | 4.4 GHz+47% | 3 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz | 2.65 GHz+6% |
| L3 Cache | 18 MB (total) | 128 MB (total)+611% |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core)+25% | 1 MB (per core) |
| Process | Intel 7 nm | 5 nm-29% |
| Architecture | Alder Lake-S (2022) | Siena (2023−2024) |
| PassMark | 19,532 | 57,127+192% |
| 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 EPYC 8324P uses SP6 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-12400F versus 4800 on the EPYC 8324P — the EPYC 8324P supports 199.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 8324P supports up to 1152 of RAM compared to 128 GB — 160% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-12400F) vs 6 (EPYC 8324P). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-12400F) vs 96 (EPYC 8324P) — the EPYC 8324P offers 76 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-12400F) and SP6 (EPYC 8324P).
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 8324P |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | SP6 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 4.0+33% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 | 4800+95900% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB+11650744% | 1152 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 6+200% |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | 96+380% |
Advanced Features
Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i5-12400F) vs VT-x, VT-d (EPYC 8324P). Primary use case: Core i5-12400F targets Gaming Performance/Value. Direct competitor: Core i5-12400F rivals Ryzen 5 5600; EPYC 8324P rivals Xeon Platinum 8452Y.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 8324P |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | — | None |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d, EPT | VT-x, VT-d |
| Target Use | Gaming Performance/Value | — |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-12400F launched at $174 MSRP, while the EPYC 8324P debuted at $1895. On MSRP ($174 vs $1895), the Core i5-12400F is $1721 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-12400F delivers 112.3 pts/$ vs 30.1 pts/$ for the EPYC 8324P — making the Core i5-12400F the 115.3% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 8324P |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $174-91% | $1895 |
| Performance per Dollar | 112.3+273% | 30.1 |
| Release Date | 2022 | 2023 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












