AMD Ryzen 5 8400F vs Intel Core i5-12450HX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep: the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F wins all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the Intel Core i5-12450HX. The margin is not uniform, however, and the distribution of those wins reveals where each architecture excels.

The largest single advantage appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core. The Ryzen 5 8400F scores 20,851 versus 11,390 for the Intel part, a delta of 83.1%. This is the standout result in the entire comparison, and it indicates that the AMD processor sustains its multi-threaded throughput far better under sustained all-core load. The gap narrows considerably in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the AMD part scores 8,757 against 6,304, a 38.9% advantage. Both results point in the same direction, but the R23 delta is more than double the R20 delta, suggesting that the Intel part degrades more severely as the workload length increases.

Single-core performance tells a similar story, though with smaller margins. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Ryzen 5 8400F posts 2,943 versus 2,119 for the Intel chip, a 38.9% lead. The Cinebench R15 and R20 single-core tests both show the AMD part ahead by 39%. These consistent single-core deltas across three generations of the Cinebench suite indicate a genuine per-thread performance advantage, not a workload-specific artifact.

The PassMark suite adds granularity. The largest PassMark win for the AMD part is in find prime numbers, where it scores 89 versus 54, a 64.8% lead. Extended instructions show a 60.3% advantage (22,175 versus 13,832). Random string sorting favors the AMD chip by 48.5% (34,604 versus 23,306). Data compression shows a 31.2% lead (288,158 versus 219,707), while data encryption is 37.5% ahead (16,646 versus 12,110). Integer math favors the AMD part by 29.4% (74,021 versus 57,189), and multithread by 33.5% (24,389 versus 18,274).

The narrowest wins are worth examining separately. Floating point math shows only a 7.2% lead for the AMD processor (46,217 versus 43,126). Single-thread PassMark shows a 10.3% advantage (3,685 versus 3,340). Physics shows a 22.7% lead (1,332 versus 1,086). These smaller gaps suggest that in FP-heavy or lightly threaded tasks, the Intel part is comparatively competitive, even though it does not take a single win.

The average benchmark scores place the Ryzen 5 8400F at 25,005 and the Intel Core i5-12450HX at 24,576, a 429-point difference. Both processors sit at the 77th percentile among all CPUs in the database. The nearest rivals for the AMD part are the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F (24,964, a delta of 0.2%), the Intel Core i7-11850H (24,935, a delta of 0.3%), the Intel Core i7-13620H (24,911, a delta of 0.4%), and the AMD EPYC 9474F (25,103, a delta of -0.4%). The Intel part's nearest rivals are the Intel Core i5-11600 (24,563, a delta of 0.1%), the AMD EPYC 9654P (24,465, a delta of 0.5%), the AMD Ryzen 7 5700X3D (24,709, a delta of -0.5%), and the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X3D (24,728, a delta of -0.6%). The Ryzen 5 8400F sits effectively at parity with its closest rival, the Ryzen 5 7500F, while the Intel part is essentially tied with the Core i5-11600. The database placement is identical at percentile 77, so despite the head-to-head sweep, both chips occupy the same overall performance tier.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design lineages. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F uses the Zen 4 architecture under the Phoenix codename, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It is a desktop part in the 8000 series. The Intel Core i5-12450HX uses the Alder Lake architecture under the Alder Lake-HX codename, built on a 10 nm process at Intel. It is a mobile part in the Core 12th Gen series.

The core counts differ despite identical thread counts. The AMD chip has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel chip has 8 cores and 12 threads. This means the Intel part relies on fewer threads per core, while the AMD part uses simultaneous multithreading across all six cores. The Intel part's 8-core, 12-thread configuration implies a hybrid arrangement where not all cores contribute equally to thread count, a structural difference from the AMD part's uniform 6-core, 12-thread setup.

Clock speeds favor the AMD part. The Ryzen 5 8400F has a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The Intel part has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. The AMD chip runs over 1.5 GHz higher at base, which explains much of its single-thread advantage in the recorded benchmarks.

Cache layouts differ in both capacity and distribution. The AMD part has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The Intel part has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The Intel chip has more L1 and L2 per core, but the AMD chip has 4 MB more shared L3. The larger shared L3 on the AMD part likely contributes to its strong showing in data compression and random string sorting, workloads that benefit from larger on-die caches.

Memory support also differs. The AMD part supports DDR5 only, with dual-channel memory and a recorded memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. The Intel part supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, but no memory bandwidth figure is recorded in the database. The AMD part's exclusive DDR5 support and explicit bandwidth number suggest a more modern memory path, though the Intel part's dual-generation support offers platform flexibility.

PCIe capabilities differ by generation and lane count. The AMD part provides PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The Intel part provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The Intel part has the newer PCIe generation, but the lane counts match.

Integrated graphics separate the two clearly. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A. The Intel Core i5-12450HX includes UHD Graphics 710. For systems requiring a display output without a discrete GPU, the Intel part has an advantage.

The AMD part is built on a 178 mm² die with 25,000 million transistors. The Intel part has a 215 mm² die, with no transistor count recorded. The AMD die is smaller despite having a recorded transistor count, a reflection of the denser 4 nm process. The Intel die is larger, consistent with the 10 nm process and the integrated GPU.

The sockets are incompatible. The AMD part uses AMD Socket AM5, a desktop socket. The Intel part uses Intel BGA 1964, a mobile ball-grid array. The market segments reflect this: the AMD part is a desktop processor, the Intel part is a mobile processor. Both are currently in active production.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F wins every recorded benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, so the use-case split is not about which chip wins a given task, but about which tasks show the smallest or largest margins.

The AMD part is strongest in sustained multi-core rendering. The 83.1% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core makes it the clear choice for long-running CPU render workloads, video encoding, or any all-core compute that runs for minutes at a time. The Cinebench R15 and R20 multi-core results, with deltas of 39% and 38.9% respectively, confirm this pattern across different workload durations.

The AMD part also dominates integer-heavy and encryption-heavy workloads. Integer math shows a 29.4% lead, data encryption shows a 37.5% lead, and data compression shows a 31.2% lead. These are common in database operations, file compression tools, and cryptographic tasks. The extended instructions test, with a 60.3% lead, suggests the AMD part executes vectorized and specialized instruction paths more efficiently.

The narrowest margin, floating point math at 7.2%, indicates that the Intel part is comparatively closer in FP-heavy scientific or simulation workloads. The single-thread PassMark result, a 10.3% lead for AMD, shows that lightly threaded general productivity tasks still favor the AMD chip, but by a much smaller amount than the multi-threaded tests.

The Intel part's remaining appeal comes from platform features rather than benchmark wins. It includes integrated graphics, which the AMD part lacks entirely. It supports the newer PCIe Gen 5 standard. It offers DDR4 and DDR5 memory compatibility, giving system builders the option to reuse older DDR4 memory. These are practical advantages for a mobile platform where discrete graphics may not always be present.

For a desktop builder with a discrete GPU, the AMD part's benchmark dominance and dedicated graphics requirement are irrelevant to its performance in compute tasks. For a mobile system integrator needing integrated display output, the Intel part provides that capability, though it loses every compute benchmark in this comparison.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F wins all multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core it scores 20,851 versus 11,390 for the Intel Core i5-12450HX, a 83.1% lead. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 8,757 versus 6,304, a 38.9% advantage.

Q: How do the single-thread scores compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F leads in every single-thread test. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 2,943 versus 2,119, a 38.9% lead. PassMark single-thread shows 3,685 versus 3,340, a 10.3% lead.

Q: Do both processors have the same thread count?

A: Yes, both have 12 threads. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core i5-12450HX has 8 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Which processor includes integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i5-12450HX includes UHD Graphics 710. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A in the database.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has a recorded memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s with DDR5 support. The Intel Core i5-12450HX supports DDR4 and DDR5, but no memory bandwidth figure is recorded for it.

Q: How do these processors compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has an average benchmark score of 25,005, placing it 0.2% above the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F. The Intel Core i5-12450HX has an average of 24,576, placing it 0.1% above the Intel Core i5-11600. Both sit at the 77th percentile among all CPUs.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every hardware dimension. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core i5-12450HX has 8 cores and 12 threads. The AMD base clock is 4.20 GHz versus 2.40 GHz for Intel, and the AMD boost clock is 4.70 GHz versus 4.40 GHz. The AMD part has a TDP of 65 watts, the Intel part 55 watts.

The sockets are entirely different: AMD Socket AM5 for the AMD part, Intel BGA 1964 for the Intel part. The AMD part uses the Zen 4 architecture with the Phoenix codename, while the Intel part uses Alder Lake with the Alder Lake-HX codename. Process nodes differ as well: 4 nm at TSMC for AMD, 10 nm at Intel for the Intel part.

Cache structures diverge. The AMD part has 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3. The Intel part has 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3. Die size differs: 178 mm² for AMD versus 215 mm² for Intel. The AMD part records 25,000 million transistors; no transistor count is recorded for the Intel part.

Memory support differs in scope. The AMD part supports DDR5 only, while the Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but only the AMD part has a recorded memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. PCIe support differs by generation: the AMD part uses Gen 4 with 20 lanes, the Intel part uses Gen 5 with 20 lanes.

Integrated graphics are present only on the Intel part, which includes UHD Graphics 710. The AMD part lists N/A. The market segments differ: the AMD part is a desktop processor, the Intel part is a mobile processor. The AMD part has a launch MSRP of $170, while the Intel part has a launch MSRP of $284. Both have unlocked multipliers and neither supports ECC memory. The AMD release date is 2024-03-31, while the Intel release date is 2022-05-09.