CPU Comparison

The Intel Core 3 201E and Intel Core i5-12400F are both active desktop processors on the Intel Socket 1700 platform, and their aggregate benchmark scores are nearly identical. The Core 3 201E averages 19056 points, while the i5-12400F averages 19039 points, a difference of only 0.1%. Both occupy the 73rd percentile among all CPUs. Despite this statistical tie, the two chips achieve parity through very different means, with the i5-12400F winning 13 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks while the Core 3 201E takes only 4 wins. The data shows a clear split: the i5-12400F dominates in most multi-threaded and legacy workloads, while the Core 3 201E counters with newer Cinebench results and identical single-thread PassMark performance.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-12400F is the clear winner for heavily threaded and compute-intensive tasks. Its six physical cores and twelve threads give it a substantial advantage over the Core 3 201E's four cores and eight threads. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i5-12400F scores 1759 against 1271, a 27.7% lead. The gap persists in Cinebench R20 multicore, where the i5-12400F posts 6980 versus 5297, a 24.1% advantage. PassMark integer math shows a 26.8% lead (59995 vs 43894), and floating-point math favors the i5-12400F by 28.9% (46759 vs 33260). Data compression is another stronghold, with the i5-12400F scoring 233327 compared to 164160, a 29.6% margin. Encryption workloads also favor the i5-12400F by 23.5% (11679 vs 8931). Even in lighter threaded tests, the i5-12400F holds the edge: Cinebench R15 single-core is 244 vs 179 (26.6% ahead), and Cinebench R20 single-core is 985 vs 747 (24.2% ahead).

The Intel Core 3 201E wins in two specific areas: the latest Cinebench R23 tests and PassMark single-thread. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Core 3 201E scores 12613 against the i5-12400F's 12380, a 1.9% win. The single-core R23 result is more decisive, with the Core 3 201E at 1780 versus 1680, a 6% advantage. PassMark single-thread scores are effectively tied, with the Core 3 201E at 3482 and the i5-12400F at 3481. The Core 3 201E also wins the PassMark physics and random string sorting tests, though the margins are small: physics is 1141 vs 1202 (a 5.1% deficit for the Core 3) and random string sorting is 17783 vs 22975 (a 22.6% deficit). For users running the most current Cinebench R23 workload, the Core 3 201E is the better choice, but the i5-12400F is superior across nearly every other measured metric.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share the same Intel Socket 1700, the same 10 nm process node, the same 163 mm² die size, and the same foundry. Both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The core configuration is the primary architectural divergence. The Core 3 201E is built on the Bartlett Lake codename, with 4 cores and 8 threads. The i5-12400F uses the Alder Lake-S codename from the Core 12th Gen series, with 6 cores and 12 threads. This difference in physical cores drives most of the performance gap in multi-threaded benchmarks.

Cache hierarchies also differ. Both chips have 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1.25 MB of L2 per core. The L3 cache, however, is larger on the i5-12400F: 18 MB shared versus 12 MB shared on the Core 3 201E. This 6 MB difference in L3 likely contributes to the i5-12400F's advantage in data-heavy PassMark workloads. The Core 3 201E supports ECC memory, while the i5-12400F does not. The i5-12400F has no integrated graphics, whereas the Core 3 201E includes UHD Graphics 730. PCIe lane count also differs: the i5-12400F offers 20 Gen 5 lanes from the CPU, while the Core 3 201E provides 16 Gen 5 lanes. Memory bandwidth is listed for the Core 3 201E at 76.8 GB/s; the i5-12400F's bandwidth is not specified in the data.

Clock speeds further separate the two. The Core 3 201E has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The i5-12400F runs at a lower 2.50 GHz base but boosts to 4.40 GHz. Despite the higher boost clock on the Core 3 201E, the i5-12400F's extra cores deliver better raw throughput in most tests. The TDP difference is modest: 60 watts for the Core 3 201E versus 65 watts for the i5-12400F. Release dates are also distinct, with the i5-12400F launching on 2022-01-03 and the Core 3 201E on 2025-01-12.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E wins Cinebench R23 multicore with a score of 12613, compared to the Intel Core i5-12400F's 12380. This is a 1.9% advantage for the Core 3 201E.

Q: Does the i5-12400F support ECC memory?

A: No. ECC memory support is listed as false for the Intel Core i5-12400F. The Intel Core 3 201E does support ECC memory.

Q: Which CPU has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E includes UHD Graphics 730. The Intel Core i5-12400F does not have integrated graphics, as indicated by the null value in its specifications.

Q: How do their single-thread PassMark scores compare?

A: They are essentially identical. The Intel Core 3 201E scores 3482, and the Intel Core i5-12400F scores 3481, a difference of 0%.

Q: What is the L3 cache capacity difference?

A: The Intel Core i5-12400F has 18 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core 3 201E has 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The i5-12400F has 6 MB more.

Q: Which processor has more PCIe lanes from the CPU?

A: The Intel Core i5-12400F provides 20 Gen 5 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel Core 3 201E provides 16 Gen 5 lanes.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 3 201E | Intel Core i5-12400F |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 4 | 6 |

| Threads | 8 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 3.60 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.80 GHz | 4.40 GHz |

| TDP | 60 W | 65 W |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Alder Lake-S |

| Generation | Core 3 (Bartlett Lake) | Core i5 (Alder Lake-S) |

| L3 Cache | 12 MB (shared) | 18 MB (shared) |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe Lanes | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | None |

| Memory Bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | Not specified |

| Release Date | 2025-01-12 | 2022-01-03 |

| Part Number | SRVTR | SRL4WSRL5Z |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results paint a consistent picture of the i5-12400F's dominance in older and more traditional benchmarks. The largest single win for the i5-12400F comes in PassMark extended instructions, where it scores 15834 against 11035, a 30.3% advantage. Data compression follows closely, with the i5-12400F ahead by 29.6% (233327 vs 164160). Floating-point math shows a 28.9% lead for the i5-12400F (46759 vs 33260), and Cinebench R15 multicore shows a 27.7% lead (1759 vs 1271). Integer math is 26.8% higher on the i5-12400F (59995 vs 43894), and Cinebench R15 single-core is 26.6% higher (244 vs 179). The i5-12400F also leads in Cinebench R20 multicore by 24.1% (6980 vs 5297) and single-core by 24.2% (985 vs 747). PassMark multithread shows a 23.6% gap (19433 vs 14839), and encryption is 23.5% higher (11679 vs 8931). Random string sorting favors the i5-12400F by 22.6% (22975 vs 17783), find prime numbers by 20.8% (72 vs 57), and physics by 5.1% (1202 vs 1141).

The Core 3 201E's wins are concentrated in the Cinebench R23 suite, which is the most recent rendering benchmark in the data. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Core 3 201E scores 12613, edging out the i5-12400F's 12380 by 1.9%. The single-core R23 result is more emphatic: 1780 versus 1680, a 6% win. The two PassMark single-thread tests are dead even, with both chips at 3482 and 3481 respectively, giving the Core 3 201E a nominal 0% win. These results indicate that the Core 3 201E's higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz provides a tangible benefit in the newest single-threaded rendering test, but this advantage does not carry over to older Cinebench versions. The aggregate data suggests that for users whose primary workload is Cinebench R23, the Core 3 201E is the better performer; for everything else, the i5-12400F's additional cores and larger L3 cache provide a compelling, consistent advantage.