
Core i5-12400F
Popular choices:

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX
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 $975 less on MSRP ($174 MSRP vs $1,149 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 285.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 112.3 vs 29.1 PassMark/$ ($174 MSRP vs $1,149 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 280W, a 215W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of sWRX8 and DDR4.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (12,380 vs 18,500).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (18 MB vs 64 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX, which brings 12 cores / 24 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX
2020Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +19.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+255.6% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 18 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 12 cores / 24 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 29.1 vs 112.3 PassMark/$ ($1,149 MSRP vs $174 MSRP).
- ❌330.8% higher power demand at 280W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on sWRX8 with DDR4, while Core i5-12400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-12400F.
Core i5-12400F
2022Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX
2020Why buy it
- ✅Costs $975 less on MSRP ($174 MSRP vs $1,149 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 285.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 112.3 vs 29.1 PassMark/$ ($174 MSRP vs $1,149 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 280W, a 215W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of sWRX8 and DDR4.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +19.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+255.6% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 18 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 12 cores / 24 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (12,380 vs 18,500).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (18 MB vs 64 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX, which brings 12 cores / 24 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 29.1 vs 112.3 PassMark/$ ($1,149 MSRP vs $174 MSRP).
- ❌330.8% higher power demand at 280W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on sWRX8 with DDR4, while Core i5-12400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-12400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX 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 | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 183 FPS | 202 FPS |
| medium | 168 FPS | 164 FPS |
| high | 139 FPS | 138 FPS |
| ultra | 119 FPS | 104 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 183 FPS |
| medium | 132 FPS | 145 FPS |
| high | 106 FPS | 116 FPS |
| ultra | 89 FPS | 88 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 87 FPS | 86 FPS |
| medium | 81 FPS | 73 FPS |
| high | 64 FPS | 57 FPS |
| ultra | 49 FPS | 46 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 471 FPS | 557 FPS |
| medium | 397 FPS | 485 FPS |
| high | 341 FPS | 395 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 351 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 407 FPS | 478 FPS |
| medium | 351 FPS | 424 FPS |
| high | 309 FPS | 356 FPS |
| ultra | 265 FPS | 296 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 282 FPS | 299 FPS |
| medium | 248 FPS | 268 FPS |
| high | 229 FPS | 243 FPS |
| ultra | 196 FPS | 217 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 772 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 637 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 568 FPS |
| ultra | 488 FPS | 494 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 599 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 494 FPS |
| high | 485 FPS | 436 FPS |
| ultra | 434 FPS | 376 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 442 FPS | 431 FPS |
| medium | 389 FPS | 344 FPS |
| high | 337 FPS | 303 FPS |
| ultra | 274 FPS | 243 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 836 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 836 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 823 FPS |
| ultra | 488 FPS | 725 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 836 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 745 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 630 FPS |
| ultra | 473 FPS | 540 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 594 FPS |
| medium | 450 FPS | 540 FPS |
| high | 391 FPS | 468 FPS |
| ultra | 330 FPS | 405 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-12400F and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX

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.


Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX
The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 14 July 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Castle Peak (2020) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 4 GHz, with boost up to 4.3 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm, 12 nm process technology. Socket: sWRX8. Thermal design power (TDP): 280 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 33,455 points. Launch price was $499.
Processing Power
The Core i5-12400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX offers 12 cores / 24 threads — the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX has 6 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.4 GHz on the Core i5-12400F versus 4.3 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX — a 2.3% clock advantage for the Core i5-12400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 4 GHz). The Core i5-12400F uses the Alder Lake-S (2022) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX uses Castle Peak (2020) (7 nm, 12 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-12400F scores 19,532 against the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX's 33,455 — a 52.6% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 12,380 vs 18,500 (39.6% advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,700 vs 1,652, a 2.9% lead for the Core i5-12400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 657 vs 11,500 (178.4% advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX). L3 cache: 18 MB (total) on the Core i5-12400F vs 64 MB on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 12 / 24+100% |
| Boost Clock | 4.4 GHz+2% | 4.3 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz | 4 GHz+60% |
| L3 Cache | 18 MB (total) | 64 MB+256% |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core)+150% | 512 kB (per core) |
| Process | Intel 7 nm | 7 nm, 12 nm |
| Architecture | Alder Lake-S (2022) | Castle Peak (2020) |
| PassMark | 19,532 | 33,455+71% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 12,380 | 18,500+49% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,700+3% | 1,652 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 657 | 11,500+1650% |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-12400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX uses sWRX8 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-12400F versus DDR4-3200 on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX — the Core i5-12400F supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX supports up to 2048 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 176.5% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-12400F) vs 8 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-12400F) vs 128 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX) — the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX offers 108 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-12400F) and WRX80 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX).
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | sWRX8 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 4.0+33% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200+25% | DDR4-3200 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB | 2048 GB+1500% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 8+300% |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | 128+540% |
Advanced Features
Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i5-12400F) vs AMD-V (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX). Primary use case: Core i5-12400F targets Gaming Performance/Value, Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX targets Professional Workstation. Direct competitor: Core i5-12400F rivals Ryzen 5 5600; Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX rivals Xeon w5-2455X.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | — | Yes |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d, EPT | AMD-V |
| Target Use | Gaming Performance/Value | Professional Workstation |
Value Analysis
The Core i5-12400F launched at $174 MSRP, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX debuted at $1149. On MSRP ($174 vs $1149), the Core i5-12400F is $975 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-12400F delivers 112.3 pts/$ vs 29.1 pts/$ for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX — making the Core i5-12400F the 117.6% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $174-85% | $1149 |
| Performance per Dollar | 112.3+286% | 29.1 |
| Release Date | 2022 | 2020 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.











