Intel Core i5-12400 Early Review Dubs it a Game Changer

[btb]

Looks like intel is bringing the price/performance goods with this one. Its ironic if this ends up being the best of the alder lake lineup, simply because its the only one without the useless e-cores.

 

[Garrus]

How it is possible to compare highend chipset and mid? OFC AL wont be cost effective (its K), if buy enthusiast grade components. If 12400 ll cost ~ 200€ and it ll be 10% faster as AMD counterpart for 320, its a great value. And hopefully there ll be good enought motherboard for this CPU around 70-90€.

As gamer i dont care if E cores are there or not. If ST performance is better (and it is 15-20% compared with 11400). I wan it.

AL is not cost effective because of ram and motherboard costs. And yes, since Ryzen 5600X costs about $270, a $200 competitor would be great. But that is 15 months later. Its competition hasn't been announced yet. That's like comparing an RTX 3080 versus the Radeon 5700 XT instead of versus the 6900 XT that came out a month later.

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

 

[igorsLAB]

FPS isn't all. Have a look at the P1 and especially the power draw. THIS is a big advantage.
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.

 

[Leshy]

AL is not cost effective because of ram and motherboard costs.

Boards are pricey, because they all can be and should be used only with 12900k .. There is not single board out in my region that cannot run 12900k OC. If u dont buy DDR5 its not. And i dont think, that u need to buy DDR5 for desktop.

But that is 15 months later.

We will see what amd ll bring to the market. Hopefully they ll bring back non x cpu line

edit:

E-Cores do matter. That's what makes the i7 a 5900X

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.

I just built a 10400 system for a friend, he loved the very low price.

uhm .. good for him, but its OT again

 

[Wirko]

turns out omitting a single ? can sensationalise a headline a lot

Hah, yes. You're obviously acquainted with Betteridge's law of headlines but not everyone is.

 

[EatingDirt]

Early *Simulated* Review. It's not a review when it's not reviewing the actual product.

 

[Vader]

Call me crazy, but i do think that a stronger cpu, at a lower price and power consumption is a game changer.

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

 

[watzupken]

Knowing Intel, they will surely gimp the i5 such that it will not be competitive against its higher end CPUs. Cache size is surely one of the things that will be reduced, and likely quite significantly. Otherwise, intel won't have to go through the trouble of coming up with a new chip just to provide 6 cores for the i5 12400/ 12500, when they can just use the same chip powering the i5 12600 series.

 

[InVasMani]

Call me crazy, but i do think that a stronger cpu, at a lower price and power consumption is a game changer.

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

For how long exactly!!? I agree about the iGPU it's a nice have and good point if both are priced the same and taking into context MB costs of both as well. I think iGPU's are nicer additions today on CPU's than 5 to 10 years ago though I'd still have rather seen the 12700K and 12900K forgo the iGPU and used the die space for more E cores. The 12600K seems more appropriate for the inclusion of a iGPU out of the three to me personally. The other two are higher end CPU's treat them as such is how I feel about it.

 

[phanbuey]

30 mb vs 18mb of cache is a massive difference. It won't perform as well as it did here.

Still a great chip but yeah this are some very optimistic numbers.

 

[HD64G]

So, if that CPU goes on sale with a price close to $200 and if its performance is indeed the one shown in the graphs, will push AMD even more to lower their CPUs prices. Nice for all of us.

 

[Deleted member 185088]

Exactly. Intel was so far behind here. So far all Alder Lake means is AMD has to lower prices, they don't even need new products honestly except they want to keep their average selling price high. Motherboards are typical Intel double pricing versus B550, a joke. I like my Alder Lake system but it was not cost effective and the entire point of Alder Lake is the e cores, which you get ZERO with the 12400.

I was considering Alder Lake then I saw the stupid board prices, the cheapest was around 100$ than a solid B550 board, worse if you get a more sensible board. I still don't understand how those so called reviewers consider Alder Lake competitive. It's the fastest yes, but cannot compete with AMD till we have reasonably priced motherboards.

 

[igorsLAB]

I was considering Alder Lake then I saw the stupid board prices, the cheapest was around 100$ than a solid B550 board, worse if you get a more sensible board. I still don't understand how those so called reviewers consider Alder Lake competitive. It's the fastest yes, but cannot compete with AMD till we have reasonably priced motherboards.

Remember... The first X570 boards were around 200 Euros, same game. B550 came later. Same with Intels B and H boards.

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

 

[bug]

I was considering Alder Lake then I saw the stupid board prices, the cheapest was around 100$ than a solid B550 board, worse if you get a more sensible board. I still don't understand how those so called reviewers consider Alder Lake competitive. It's the fastest yes, but cannot compete with AMD till we have reasonably priced motherboards.

They're coming Q1'22. Remember X570 was the only option for Zen for about a year.

 

[InVasMani]

I don't always buy E-cores, but when I do I disable them so I won't miss the cache I only need 640KB. The Ultra Mobile 2+8 btw looks more interesting to me than the i5-12400. I happen to like disabling the E cores though especially more of them. I do like the E cores overall though from what I've digested about them. I could quite easily get by with less P cores and not miss them a whole lot though. It's worth sacrificing a P core just to not have to ever hear Microsoft pester me about a virus scan again.

 

[Caring1]

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.

From the O.P. here:
"the i5-12400 was simulated on a C0 silicon, possibly the i9-12900K"

 

[InVasMani]

IgorsLAB already droppin BS on us after like four posts...sure knows how to make a entrance on TPU.

 

[igorsLAB]

From the O.P. here:
"the i5-12400 was simulated on a C0 silicon, possibly the i9-12900K"

Fake news

 

[TheDeeGee]

I wouldnt call it a "Game changer" but more of a competitive product that trades blows with the 1yr old 5600X. Coool?

Haters gonna hate i guess.

 

[Chrispy_]

Won't the real i5-12400 have less cache, making these results with 30MB L3 of the i9 completely invalid? (on the assumption they did use their i9 review sample)

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.

 

[dicktracy]

Easy cake walk. Zen3D will be useless... just look at the difference between 5950x and 5800x. Moar cache only helps up to a certain point. The IPC is still slow.

 

[RedelZaVedno]

This baby's going into my HTPC build.

 

[InVasMani]

Easy cake walk. Zen3D will be useless... just look at the difference between 5950x and 5800x. Moar cache only helps up to a certain point. The IPC is still slow.

I imagine it'll be a bit of cache, frequency, and ipc uplift with the cache being similar Broadwell EDRAM and the frequency and ipc much like the other Ryzen generations. A nice perk to someone switching to Ryzen is DDR4 performance and pricing for better kits of DDR4 should improve some between now and launch I'd hope.

This baby's going into my HTPC build.

I think it could be really good for that use case especially with the iGPU codecs support.

 

[95Viper]

Let's stay on topic.
Tone down the comments about other members.

 

[Readlight]

Old videocards works faster with i9?