
Core i5-12400F
Popular choices:

Xeon W-3345
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 $2,325 less on MSRP ($174 MSRP vs $2,499 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 482.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 112.3 vs 19.3 PassMark/$ ($174 MSRP vs $2,499 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 250W, a 185W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA4189 and DDR4.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon W-3345.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon W-3345 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (19,532 vs 48,140).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (18 MB vs 36 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3345, which brings 24 cores / 48 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
Xeon W-3345
2021Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +32.1% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+100% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 18 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 24 cores / 48 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 19.3 vs 112.3 PassMark/$ ($2,499 MSRP vs $174 MSRP).
- ❌284.6% higher power demand at 250W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA4189 with DDR4, while Core i5-12400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-12400F.
Core i5-12400F
2022Xeon W-3345
2021Why buy it
- ✅Costs $2,325 less on MSRP ($174 MSRP vs $2,499 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 482.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 112.3 vs 19.3 PassMark/$ ($174 MSRP vs $2,499 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 250W, a 185W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA4189 and DDR4.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon W-3345.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +32.1% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+100% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 18 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 24 cores / 48 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon W-3345 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (19,532 vs 48,140).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (18 MB vs 36 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3345, which brings 24 cores / 48 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 19.3 vs 112.3 PassMark/$ ($2,499 MSRP vs $174 MSRP).
- ❌284.6% higher power demand at 250W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA4189 with DDR4, while Core i5-12400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-12400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Xeon W-3345 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 | Xeon W-3345 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 183 FPS | 194 FPS |
| medium | 168 FPS | 155 FPS |
| high | 139 FPS | 127 FPS |
| ultra | 119 FPS | 98 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 159 FPS |
| medium | 132 FPS | 124 FPS |
| high | 106 FPS | 97 FPS |
| ultra | 89 FPS | 77 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 87 FPS | 73 FPS |
| medium | 81 FPS | 60 FPS |
| high | 64 FPS | 47 FPS |
| ultra | 49 FPS | 39 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | Xeon W-3345 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 471 FPS | 497 FPS |
| medium | 397 FPS | 431 FPS |
| high | 341 FPS | 345 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 285 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 407 FPS | 425 FPS |
| medium | 351 FPS | 376 FPS |
| high | 309 FPS | 309 FPS |
| ultra | 265 FPS | 245 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 282 FPS | 264 FPS |
| medium | 248 FPS | 237 FPS |
| high | 229 FPS | 209 FPS |
| ultra | 196 FPS | 174 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | Xeon W-3345 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 1025 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 973 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 914 FPS |
| ultra | 488 FPS | 826 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 841 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 744 FPS |
| high | 485 FPS | 699 FPS |
| ultra | 434 FPS | 626 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 442 FPS | 540 FPS |
| medium | 389 FPS | 444 FPS |
| high | 337 FPS | 390 FPS |
| ultra | 274 FPS | 320 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | Xeon W-3345 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 938 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 847 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 732 FPS |
| ultra | 488 FPS | 635 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 735 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 645 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 554 FPS |
| ultra | 473 FPS | 481 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 534 FPS |
| medium | 450 FPS | 477 FPS |
| high | 391 FPS | 419 FPS |
| ultra | 330 FPS | 362 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-12400F and Xeon W-3345

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.

Xeon W-3345
Xeon W-3345
The Xeon W-3345 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Ice Lake-W (2021) architecture. It features 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 36 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4189. Thermal design power (TDP): 250 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 48,140 points. Launch price was $800.
Processing Power
The Core i5-12400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Xeon W-3345 offers 24 cores / 48 threads — the Xeon W-3345 has 18 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.4 GHz on the Core i5-12400F versus 4 GHz on the Xeon W-3345 — a 9.5% clock advantage for the Core i5-12400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 3 GHz). The Core i5-12400F uses the Alder Lake-S (2022) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Xeon W-3345 uses Ice Lake-W (2021) (10 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-12400F scores 19,532 against the Xeon W-3345's 48,140 — a 84.5% lead for the Xeon W-3345. L3 cache: 18 MB (total) on the Core i5-12400F vs 36 MB (total) on the Xeon W-3345.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | Xeon W-3345 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 24 / 48+300% |
| Boost Clock | 4.4 GHz+10% | 4 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz | 3 GHz+20% |
| L3 Cache | 18 MB (total) | 36 MB (total)+100% |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core)+25% | 1 MB (per core) |
| Process | Intel 7 nm-30% | 10 nm |
| Architecture | Alder Lake-S (2022) | Ice Lake-W (2021) |
| PassMark | 19,532 | 48,140+146% |
| 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 Xeon W-3345 uses LGA4189 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-12400F versus 3200 on the Xeon W-3345 — the Xeon W-3345 supports 199.4% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon W-3345 supports up to 4096 of RAM compared to 128 GB — 187.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-12400F) vs 8 (Xeon W-3345). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-12400F) vs 128 (Xeon W-3345) — the Xeon W-3345 offers 108 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-12400F) and SP3,C621A (Xeon W-3345).
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | Xeon W-3345 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | LGA4189 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 4.0+33% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 | 3200+63900% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB+3276700% | 4096 |
| 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 VT-x, VT-d (Xeon W-3345). Primary use case: Core i5-12400F targets Gaming Performance/Value. Direct competitor: Core i5-12400F rivals Ryzen 5 5600; Xeon W-3345 rivals Xeon Platinum 8362.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | Xeon W-3345 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Xeon W-3345 debuted at $2499. On MSRP ($174 vs $2499), the Core i5-12400F is $2325 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-12400F delivers 112.3 pts/$ vs 19.3 pts/$ for the Xeon W-3345 — making the Core i5-12400F the 141.4% better value option.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | Xeon W-3345 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $174-93% | $2499 |
| Performance per Dollar | 112.3+482% | 19.3 |
| Release Date | 2022 | 2021 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












