Key Differences
In short — Core i5-12400 outperforms the cheaper Ryzen Threadripper 1920X on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Ryzen Threadripper 1920X is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i5-12400 is 1608 days newer than the cheaper Ryzen Threadripper 1920X.
Advantages of Ryzen Threadripper 1920X
- Up to 87% cheaper than Core i5-12400 - £334.87 vs £2511.32
- Up to 86% better value when playing Mass Effect: Andromeda than Core i5-12400 - £1.57 vs £10.92 per FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i5-12400 - 24 vs 12 threads
Advantages of Core i5-12400
- Performs up to 8% better in Mass Effect: Andromeda than Ryzen Threadripper 1920X - 230 vs 213 FPS
- Consumes up to 64% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X - 65 vs 180 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X doesn't have integrated graphics
Mass Effect: Andromeda
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Aug 10th, 2017
FPS
213
93%
Value, £/FPS
£1.57/FPS
100%
Price, £
£334.87
100%
Value Winner
Buy for £334.87 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 315 minutes ago
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2022
FPS
230
100%
Value, £/FPS
£10.92/FPS
14%
Price, £
£2511.32
13%
FPS Winner
Buy for £2,511.32 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 314 minutes ago
My Games
With selected game settings
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Aug 10th, 2017
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2022
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Ryzen Threadripper 1920X | vs | Core i5-12400 |
---|---|---|
Aug 10th, 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 |
12 | Cores | 6 |
24 | Threads | 12 |
3.5 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 |
35.0x | Multiplier | 25.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 |
Yes | Overclockable | No |