Wednesday, December 15th 2021
Intel Core i5-12400 Early Review Dubs it a Game Changer
The upcoming Intel Core i5-12400 processor could be a game changer in the mid-range, according to an early gaming performance review by Igor's Lab, which landed simulated the chip by disabling the E-cores, and setting the right clock speeds and power values. Based on the smaller H0 silicon of "Alder Lake-S," which physically only features six "Golden Cove" CPU cores, and no "Gracemont" E-core clusters, the i5-12400 ticks at 2.50 GHz, and 4.40 GHz boost frequency, with 65 W base power, and 117 W maximum turbo power (MTP).
Testing reveals that this MTP value lends the processor some stellar energy-efficiency numbers, and the chip strikes a performance/Watt sweetspot. Igor's Lab, however, recommends that for the best efficiency, the i5-12400 should be paired with DDR4 memory. In its testing, DDR4-3733 (with Gear 1) was used. Gaming benchmarks put out by Igor's Lab shows that the Core i5-12400 trades blows with the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X "Zen 3" in a number of games, beating it in several of them by virtue of higher IPC of the "Golden Cove" cores, and beating the i7-11700K "Rocket Lake" 8-core/16-thread processor at a fraction of its power-draw. A word of caution, though, is that the i5-12400 was simulated on a C0 silicon, possibly the i9-12900K, and the real i5-12400 die may not have the same refinements or electrical characteristics. Even with the E-core cluster disabled, the L3 cache size isn't the same (30 MB vs. 18 MB). Catch the review in the source link below.
Source:
Igor's Lab
Testing reveals that this MTP value lends the processor some stellar energy-efficiency numbers, and the chip strikes a performance/Watt sweetspot. Igor's Lab, however, recommends that for the best efficiency, the i5-12400 should be paired with DDR4 memory. In its testing, DDR4-3733 (with Gear 1) was used. Gaming benchmarks put out by Igor's Lab shows that the Core i5-12400 trades blows with the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X "Zen 3" in a number of games, beating it in several of them by virtue of higher IPC of the "Golden Cove" cores, and beating the i7-11700K "Rocket Lake" 8-core/16-thread processor at a fraction of its power-draw. A word of caution, though, is that the i5-12400 was simulated on a C0 silicon, possibly the i9-12900K, and the real i5-12400 die may not have the same refinements or electrical characteristics. Even with the E-core cluster disabled, the L3 cache size isn't the same (30 MB vs. 18 MB). Catch the review in the source link below.
66 Comments on Intel Core i5-12400 Early Review Dubs it a Game Changer
Once again, 1.2 percent higher FPS is not "game changing". You can't even notice 1.2 percent. Just say it is $70 cheaper, has the same performance, and uses 25 percent less electricity. That's nice. Not a game changer. A Ryzen 5600X with a slight reduction to voltage and a $50 price drop is already equal to it. Competition is the next Ryzen chip to be announced in 3 weeks, stay tuned.
E-Cores do matter. That's what makes the i7 a 5900X competitor and not a 5800X one. So this 12400 is a 5600X competitor, but the 12600K is a much better buy, a 5800X competitor. The only reason the i5-12600k isn't much better is as I said before, the overpriced motherboards and ram.
I just built a 10400 system for a friend, he loved the very low price. Cheers :)
It runs smoother and up to 37% more efficient than a 5600X. 45 Watts and 1440p? Awesome.
That's (and the possible price) the reason for the headline, nothing else :)
The emulation is based on the same six-core, but disabled E-cores. Load line, amps and powerlimits were the same as the QS. I was able to read out the 12400 and use the same settings for the 12600. I have no ideam why everybody is writing 12900... That's simply BS. :D
edit:Discussion is not about i7 and r9. Its about 12400 and 5600x. Lest stick with this topic. If u game, u need only P cores.uhm .. good for him, but its OT again :)
We still don't know how much b660 will cost, but there is quite a gap between the 5600X and the 12400 expected price. Intel also has igpu which can be handy
Still a great chip but yeah this are some very optimistic numbers.
BTW: The numbers are not optimistic. The i5-12600K has 20 MB of cache (not 30, nobody used the 12900K, this news is wrong not my review!), the i5-12400 18 MB. If you have a look at the cache structure, you will understand, that the missing cache is connected to the e-cores. So you won't miss the cache, if the e-cores were deactivated ;)
"the i5-12400 was simulated on a C0 silicon, possibly the i9-12900K"
The 30MB L3 cache on the i9 is a significant contributor to its overall performance so the i5 without E-cores may have less than 20MB. HWU did a cache-scaling video a couple of weeks back and the impact of the L3 is absolutely huge in gamin; More significant than adding extra cores in some games.
Tone down the comments about other members.
I3 10100F was a great CPU for only 80€.
Cache X2 ish equals +15% according to their rivals.
And exaggerated much.
which i did
Also... it seems that x370 board just got a BIOS update, i'll go confirm what AGESA that is, now :D
(aww still 1.0.0.6)
Looks like info got messed up in translation or missed, with the 12900K being referenced instead of a 12600kThe source button is visible on the main TPU article - although it's suble in the bottom left.
It's not visible in the forum version of the frontpage preview.
It *is* a clickable link to the source page, but i guess a lot of people miss it
@W1zzard Do you think the sources links should be made more visible?