
Core i5-12400F
Popular choices:

EPYC 9135
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 $1,040 less on MSRP ($174 MSRP vs $1,214 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 135.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 112.3 vs 47.6 PassMark/$ ($174 MSRP vs $1,214 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 200W, a 135W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 9135.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9135 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (19,532 vs 57,808).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (18 MB vs 64 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9135, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
EPYC 9135
2024Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +8.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+255.6% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 18 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 47.6 vs 112.3 PassMark/$ ($1,214 MSRP vs $174 MSRP).
- ❌207.7% higher power demand at 200W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-12400F.
Core i5-12400F
2022EPYC 9135
2024Why buy it
- ✅Costs $1,040 less on MSRP ($174 MSRP vs $1,214 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 135.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 112.3 vs 47.6 PassMark/$ ($174 MSRP vs $1,214 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 200W, a 135W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 9135.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +8.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+255.6% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 18 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9135 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (19,532 vs 57,808).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (18 MB vs 64 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9135, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 47.6 vs 112.3 PassMark/$ ($1,214 MSRP vs $174 MSRP).
- ❌207.7% higher power demand at 200W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-12400F.
Quick Answers
So, is EPYC 9135 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 9135 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 183 FPS | 172 FPS |
| medium | 168 FPS | 139 FPS |
| high | 139 FPS | 119 FPS |
| ultra | 119 FPS | 96 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 152 FPS |
| medium | 132 FPS | 120 FPS |
| high | 106 FPS | 99 FPS |
| ultra | 89 FPS | 81 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 87 FPS | 81 FPS |
| medium | 81 FPS | 69 FPS |
| high | 64 FPS | 55 FPS |
| ultra | 49 FPS | 45 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 9135 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 471 FPS | 496 FPS |
| medium | 397 FPS | 439 FPS |
| high | 341 FPS | 341 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 293 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 407 FPS | 427 FPS |
| medium | 351 FPS | 382 FPS |
| high | 309 FPS | 309 FPS |
| ultra | 265 FPS | 248 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 282 FPS | 267 FPS |
| medium | 248 FPS | 242 FPS |
| high | 229 FPS | 211 FPS |
| ultra | 196 FPS | 183 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 9135 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 729 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 607 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 552 FPS |
| ultra | 488 FPS | 489 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 559 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 463 FPS |
| high | 485 FPS | 415 FPS |
| ultra | 434 FPS | 362 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 442 FPS | 407 FPS |
| medium | 389 FPS | 325 FPS |
| high | 337 FPS | 287 FPS |
| ultra | 274 FPS | 232 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 9135 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 929 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 846 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 732 FPS |
| ultra | 488 FPS | 660 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 735 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 652 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 561 FPS |
| ultra | 473 FPS | 493 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 524 FPS |
| medium | 450 FPS | 475 FPS |
| high | 391 FPS | 417 FPS |
| ultra | 330 FPS | 365 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-12400F and EPYC 9135

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 9135
EPYC 9135
The EPYC 9135 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.65 GHz, with boost up to 4.3 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 200 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 57,808 points. Launch price was $1,214.
Processing Power
The Core i5-12400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the EPYC 9135 offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the EPYC 9135 has 10 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.4 GHz on the Core i5-12400F versus 4.3 GHz on the EPYC 9135 — a 2.3% clock advantage for the Core i5-12400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 3.65 GHz). The Core i5-12400F uses the Alder Lake-S (2022) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the EPYC 9135 uses Turin (2024) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-12400F scores 19,532 against the EPYC 9135's 57,808 — a 99% lead for the EPYC 9135. L3 cache: 18 MB (total) on the Core i5-12400F vs 64 MB (total) on the EPYC 9135.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 9135 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 16 / 32+167% |
| Boost Clock | 4.4 GHz+2% | 4.3 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz | 3.65 GHz+46% |
| L3 Cache | 18 MB (total) | 64 MB (total)+256% |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core)+25% | 1 MB (per core) |
| Process | Intel 7 nm | 4 nm-43% |
| Architecture | Alder Lake-S (2022) | Turin (2024) |
| PassMark | 19,532 | 57,808+196% |
| 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 9135 uses SP5 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-12400F versus 6000 on the EPYC 9135 — the EPYC 9135 supports 199.7% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9135 supports up to 6144 of RAM compared to 128 GB — 191.8% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-12400F) vs 12 (EPYC 9135). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-12400F) vs 128 (EPYC 9135) — the EPYC 9135 offers 108 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-12400F) and SP5 (EPYC 9135).
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 9135 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | SP5 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 5.0+67% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 | 6000+119900% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB+2184433% | 6144 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 12+500% |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | 128+540% |
Advanced Features
Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i5-12400F) vs VT-x, VT-d (EPYC 9135). Primary use case: Core i5-12400F targets Gaming Performance/Value. Direct competitor: Core i5-12400F rivals Ryzen 5 5600; EPYC 9135 rivals Xeon Platinum 8558P.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 9135 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 9135 debuted at $1214. On MSRP ($174 vs $1214), the Core i5-12400F is $1040 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-12400F delivers 112.3 pts/$ vs 47.6 pts/$ for the EPYC 9135 — making the Core i5-12400F the 80.9% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 9135 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $174-86% | $1214 |
| Performance per Dollar | 112.3+136% | 47.6 |
| Release Date | 2022 | 2024 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












