Key Differences
In short — Core i5-12400 outperforms the cheaper Ryzen Threadripper 1900X on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Ryzen Threadripper 1900X is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i5-12400 is 1587 days newer than the cheaper Ryzen Threadripper 1900X.
Advantages of Ryzen Threadripper 1900X
- Up to 71% cheaper than Core i5-12400 - €97.00 vs €339.00
- Up to 69% better value when playing Battlefield 1 than Core i5-12400 - €0.41 vs €1.34 per FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i5-12400 - 16 vs 12 threads
Advantages of Core i5-12400
- Performs up to 6% better in Battlefield 1 than Ryzen Threadripper 1900X - 253 vs 239 FPS
- Consumes up to 64% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X - 65 vs 180 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X doesn't have integrated graphics
Battlefield 1
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Aug 31st, 2017
FPS
239
94%
Value, €/FPS
€0.41/FPS
100%
Price, €
€97
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €97 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 7504 minutes ago
Buy for €339 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 7504 minutes ago
My Games
With selected game settings
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Aug 31st, 2017
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2022
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Ryzen Threadripper 1900X | vs | Core i5-12400 |
---|---|---|
Aug 31st, 2017 | Release Date | Jan 4th, 2022 |
Ryzen Threadripper | Collection | Core i5 |
Whitehaven | Codename | Alder Lake |
AMD Socket SP3r2 | Socket | Intel Socket 1700 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 6 |
16 | Threads | 12 |
3.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.5 GHz |
4.0 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.4 GHz |
180 W | TDP | 65 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 10 nm |
38.0x | Multiplier | 25.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 |
Yes | Overclockable | No |