Core i5-12400F vs FX-8320E

CPU

GPU

Core i5-12400F

6 Cores12 Thrd65 WWMax: 4.4 GHz2022

Popular choices:

•••••••••

FX-8320E

8 Cores8 Thrd95 WWMax: 4 GHz2014

Popular choices:

i5-12400F•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i5-12400F

6 / 12

19,532

+293.8%

4,960

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX

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

2022

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +166.4% higher average FPS across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Delivers 232.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 112.3 vs 33.7 PassMark/$ ($174 MSRP vs $147 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 95W, a 30W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of AM3+ and older memory support.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (657 vs 1,734).
❌
18.4% HIGHER MSRP
$174 MSRPvs$147 MSRP

FX-8320E

2014

Why buy it

✅+163.9% higher Geekbench multi-core.
✅Costs $27 less on MSRP ($147 MSRP vs $174 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-12400F across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 33.7 vs 112.3 PassMark/$ ($147 MSRP vs $174 MSRP).
❌46.2% higher power demand at 95W vs 65W.
❌Older platform position on AM3+, while Core i5-12400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.

Core i5-12400F

2022

FX-8320E

2014

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +166.4% higher average FPS across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Delivers 232.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 112.3 vs 33.7 PassMark/$ ($174 MSRP vs $147 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 95W, a 30W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of AM3+ and older memory support.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Why buy it

✅+163.9% higher Geekbench multi-core.
✅Costs $27 less on MSRP ($147 MSRP vs $174 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (657 vs 1,734).
❌
18.4% HIGHER MSRP
$174 MSRPvs$147 MSRP

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-12400F across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 33.7 vs 112.3 PassMark/$ ($147 MSRP vs $174 MSRP).
❌46.2% higher power demand at 95W vs 65W.
❌Older platform position on AM3+, while Core i5-12400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-12400F better than FX-8320E?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, Core i5-12400F is ahead with a 166.4% average FPS lead across 6 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, FX-8320E pulls ahead with 163.9% better Geekbench multi-core.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, FX-8320E is the better fit. You are getting 163.9% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 8 cores and 8 threads.

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

Core i5-12400F is the smarter buy today. Core i5-12400F is 18.4% more expensive on MSRP at $174 MSRP versus $147 MSRP, and it gives you a 166.4% average FPS lead across 6 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that FX-8320E is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 163.9% better Geekbench multi-core. It is also 232.7% better value on MSRP (112.3 vs 33.7 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core i5-12400F is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2022 vs 2014) and a healthier platform with LGA1700 and DDR5 instead of AM3+. 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

FX-8320E Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-12400F	FX-8320E
1080p
low	183 FPS	124 FPS
medium	168 FPS	124 FPS
high	139 FPS	116 FPS
ultra	119 FPS	95 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	124 FPS
medium	132 FPS	117 FPS
high	106 FPS	93 FPS
ultra	89 FPS	76 FPS
4K
low	87 FPS	63 FPS
medium	81 FPS	57 FPS
high	64 FPS	45 FPS
ultra	49 FPS	35 FPS

Open Core i5-12400F Open FX-8320E

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-12400F	FX-8320E
1080p
low	471 FPS	124 FPS
medium	397 FPS	124 FPS
high	341 FPS	124 FPS
ultra	301 FPS	124 FPS
1440p
low	407 FPS	124 FPS
medium	351 FPS	124 FPS
high	309 FPS	124 FPS
ultra	265 FPS	124 FPS
4K
low	282 FPS	124 FPS
medium	248 FPS	124 FPS
high	229 FPS	124 FPS
ultra	196 FPS	120 FPS

Open Core i5-12400F Open FX-8320E

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-12400F	FX-8320E
1080p
low	488 FPS	124 FPS
medium	488 FPS	124 FPS
high	488 FPS	124 FPS
ultra	488 FPS	124 FPS
1440p
low	488 FPS	124 FPS
medium	488 FPS	124 FPS
high	485 FPS	124 FPS
ultra	434 FPS	124 FPS
4K
low	442 FPS	124 FPS
medium	389 FPS	124 FPS
high	337 FPS	124 FPS
ultra	274 FPS	124 FPS

Open Core i5-12400F Open FX-8320E

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-12400F	FX-8320E
1080p
low	488 FPS	124 FPS
medium	488 FPS	124 FPS
high	488 FPS	124 FPS
ultra	488 FPS	124 FPS
1440p
low	488 FPS	124 FPS
medium	488 FPS	124 FPS
high	488 FPS	124 FPS
ultra	473 FPS	124 FPS
4K
low	488 FPS	124 FPS
medium	450 FPS	124 FPS
high	391 FPS	124 FPS
ultra	330 FPS	124 FPS

Open Core i5-12400F Open FX-8320E

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-12400F and FX-8320E

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.

FX-8320E

The FX-8320E is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2 September 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Vishera (2012−2015) architecture. It features 8 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L2 cache: 8192 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: AM3+. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 4,960 points. Launch price was $147.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-12400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the FX-8320E offers 8 cores / 8 threads — the FX-8320E has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.4 GHz on the Core i5-12400F versus 4 GHz on the FX-8320E — a 9.5% clock advantage for the Core i5-12400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 3.2 GHz). The Core i5-12400F uses the Alder Lake-S (2022) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the FX-8320E uses Vishera (2012−2015) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-12400F scores 19,532 against the FX-8320E's 4,960 — a 119% lead for the Core i5-12400F. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,700 vs 439, a 117.9% lead for the Core i5-12400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 657 vs 1,734 (90.1% advantage for the FX-8320E).

Feature	Core i5-12400F	FX-8320E
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	8 / 8+33%
Boost Clock	4.4 GHz+10%	4 GHz
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	3.2 GHz+28%
L3 Cache	18 MB (total)	—
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)	8192 kB+540%
Process	Intel 7 nm-78%	32 nm
Architecture	Alder Lake-S (2022)	Vishera (2012−2015)
PassMark	19,532+294%	4,960
Cinebench R23 Multi	12,380	—
Geekbench 6 Single	1,700+287%	439
Geekbench 6 Multi	657	1,734+164%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-12400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the FX-8320E uses AM3+ (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-12400F versus DDR3-1866 on the FX-8320E — the Core i5-12400F supports 50% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i5-12400F supports up to 128 GB of RAM compared to 32 GB — 120% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-12400F) vs 0 (FX-8320E) — the Core i5-12400F offers 20 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-12400F) and AMD 990FX,AMD 970 (FX-8320E).

Feature	Core i5-12400F	FX-8320E
Socket	LGA1700	AM3+
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200+67%	DDR3-1866
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB+300%	32 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	20	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i5-12400F) vs AMD-V (FX-8320E). Primary use case: Core i5-12400F targets Gaming Performance/Value. Direct competitor: Core i5-12400F rivals Ryzen 5 5600.

Feature	Core i5-12400F	FX-8320E
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	—	Yes
AVX-512	—	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d, EPT	AMD-V
Target Use	Gaming Performance/Value	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-12400F launched at $174 MSRP, while the FX-8320E debuted at $147. On MSRP ($174 vs $147), the FX-8320E is $27 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-12400F delivers 112.3 pts/$ vs 33.7 pts/$ for the FX-8320E — making the Core i5-12400F the 107.6% better value option.