Key Differences
In short — Core i5-12400 outperforms the cheaper FX-4130 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-4130 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i5-12400 is 3417 days newer than the cheaper FX-4130.
Advantages of FX-4130
- Up to 41% cheaper than Core i5-12400 - $84.01 vs $143.57
- Up to 29% better value when playing Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Core i5-12400 - $0.50 vs $0.70 per FPS
Advantages of Core i5-12400
- Performs up to 22% better in Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than FX-4130 - 204 vs 167 FPS
- Consumes up to 48% less energy than AMD FX-4130 - 65 vs 125 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-4130 - 12 vs 4 threads
Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Buy for $84.01 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 7253 minutes ago
Buy for $143.57 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 7253 minutes ago
My Games
With selected game settings
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Aug 27th, 2012
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2022
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
FX-4130 | vs | Core i5-12400 |
---|---|---|
Aug 27th, 2012 | Release Date | Jan 4th, 2022 |
FX | Collection | Core i5 |
Zambezi | Codename | Alder Lake |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1700 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 6 |
4 | Threads | 12 |
3.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.5 GHz |
3.9 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.4 GHz |
125 W | TDP | 65 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 10 nm |
19.0x | Multiplier | 25.0x |
On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 |
Yes | Overclockable | No |