Intel Core 5 315 vs Intel Core i5-12400 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark comparison between the Intel Core i5-12400 and the Intel Core 5 315 is decisively lopsided. The i5-12400 wins 13 of the 17 head-to-head tests, while the Core 5 315 takes only 4. The overall average benchmark scores reinforce this gap: the i5-12400 records 18683 against 18188 for the Core 5 315, a difference of roughly 2.7%. Both processors sit at the 72nd percentile among all CPUs, indicating that despite the i5's broader victory count, the two land in a similar overall performance tier.

The most dramatic separation appears in PassMark integer math. The i5-12400 posts 58366 against 31690 for the Core 5 315, a 84.2% advantage. This is the single largest margin in the entire comparison. Data compression also heavily favors the i5-12400, which scores 226908 versus 146143, a 55.3% lead. Random string sorting follows with a 27.4% gap (22366 vs 17551). These three workloads all involve heavy data manipulation, suggesting the i5-12400 has a substantial edge in tasks that stress integer throughput and memory access patterns.

Cinebench results are remarkably consistent across all three versions. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the i5-12400 scores 15989 against 12981 for the Core 5 315, a 23.2% margin. The single-core R23 test shows the same 23.2% delta (2257 vs 1832). Cinebench R20 multicore repeats the pattern exactly: 6715 vs 5452, again 23.2%. R15 multicore gives 1611 vs 1308, 23.2%. The consistency across R15, R20, and R23 strongly indicates a fixed architectural performance difference that scales uniformly across rendering workloads. Single-core Cinebench results hover at 23.1% to 23.4%, nearly identical to the multicore margins. This uniformity suggests the Core 5 315 is not merely slower in parallel tasks, it is slower per-thread as well.

The Core 5 315 does claim a few wins. PassMark single-thread is its best result: 4021 vs 3456, a 14.1% advantage. This is a notable inversion, because in Cinebench single-core the i5-12400 leads by 23.2%. The two suites apparently measure different aspects of single-thread performance. PassMark physics also goes to the Core 5 315, albeit narrowly: 1163 vs 1105, a 5% margin. Prime number finding is the Core 5 315's largest victory at 39.3% (112 vs 68), though the absolute scores are small. The i5-12400 still leads in floating-point math (45494 vs 42441, 7.2%), extended instructions (15399 vs 13143, 17.2%), and data encryption (11418 vs 11119, 2.7%). Multithread PassMark goes to the i5-12400 at 18747 vs 15272, a 22.8% lead.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from entirely different design lineages. The Intel Core i5-12400 is an Alder Lake-S desktop part built on Intel's 10 nm process, while the Intel Core 5 315 uses the Wildcat Lake codename on a 3 nm node. The process node gap is substantial: 10 nm versus 3 nm, a difference that explains why the Core 5 315 achieves competitive performance at a dramatically lower power envelope.

Core counts are identical at 6, but thread counts diverge sharply. The i5-12400 supports 12 threads via Hyper-Threading, while the Core 5 315 is limited to 6 threads. This doubling of thread count is the primary reason the i5-12400 dominates multicore workloads. The Cinebench multicore margins of 23.2% align almost exactly with the thread advantage, suggesting the Core 5 315's higher per-thread efficiency cannot overcome the i5's extra threads.

Cache configurations also differ fundamentally. The i5-12400 has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 5 315 lists 192 KB of L1 total, 2.5 MB of L2 total, and only 6 MB of shared L3. The i5-12400's 18 MB L3 is three times larger than the Core 5 315's 6 MB. This cache disparity likely contributes to the i5's strong showing in data compression and random string sorting, workloads that benefit from larger working sets residing in cache.

Memory support is another major divider. The i5-12400 supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel memory bus. The Core 5 315 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X but only over a single-channel bus, with a listed memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The i5-12400 has no listed memory bandwidth figure, but dual-channel operation typically provides substantially higher throughput than single-channel. The single-channel limitation on the Core 5 315 may explain its weaker integer math and compression results, as these workloads are often memory-bandwidth sensitive.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The i5-12400 provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Core 5 315 provides Gen 4 with only 6 lanes. This makes the i5-12400 far more suitable for discrete GPUs and high-speed storage. Integrated graphics also differ: the i5-12400 has UHD Graphics 730, while the Core 5 315 has Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Core 5 315's newer graphics architecture is likely more capable for media tasks, though the database does not provide graphics benchmarks.

Socket and form factor separate the two entirely. The i5-12400 uses Intel Socket 1700 and targets the desktop market segment. The Core 5 315 uses Intel BGA 1516, a soldered mobile socket, and targets the mobile segment. The TDP figures reflect this: 65 W for the i5-12400 versus 15 W for the Core 5 315. The Core 5 315 delivers 72.5% of the i5's average benchmark score while drawing only 23.1% of the power. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, and both lack ECC memory support.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-12400 is the clear choice for desktop workloads that demand raw throughput. Its 84.2% lead in integer math and 55.3% lead in data compression make it ideal for software compilation, database processing, file archiving, and scientific computing. The 23.2% Cinebench margins across all versions indicate strong rendering performance for 3D modeling and video encoding. The dual-channel memory bus and 18 MB L3 cache provide a solid foundation for memory-intensive applications. The 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes allow for high-bandwidth GPUs and NVMe storage, making this a versatile desktop platform.

The Intel Core 5 315 wins in a narrower set of scenarios. Its 14.1% PassMark single-thread advantage suggests it handles lightly threaded applications with shorter bursts of activity, such as web browsing, office productivity, and responsive UI interactions, more efficiently. The 39.3% lead in prime number finding, while small in absolute terms, points to strength in tight loops and branch-heavy code. The 5% physics win indicates adequate performance for physics simulation in lighter workloads. The 15 W TDP makes it suitable for fanless or low-power mobile designs where battery life and thermals take priority over peak performance.

The data does not suggest the Core 5 315 can match the i5-12400 in sustained multicore work. The Core 5 315 wins in only 4 of 17 tests, and those wins are concentrated in single-threaded or narrow mathematical workloads. The average benchmark score gap of 495 points (18683 vs 18188) is modest, but the distribution of wins is heavily skewed. For users who need consistent performance across a wide range of tasks, the i5-12400 is the safer choice. For users who prioritize single-thread responsiveness and power efficiency in a mobile form factor, the Core 5 315 has specific appeal.

The Verdict

The Intel Core i5-12400 is the superior processor for desktop users who need maximum multicore throughput. It wins 13 of 17 benchmarks, leads by 23.2% in every Cinebench test, and holds a massive 84.2% advantage in integer math. The 12 threads versus 6 threads is the decisive factor. The 18 MB L3 cache and dual-channel memory bus further cement its position for data-heavy workloads. Its 65 W TDP is higher, but for a desktop platform this is acceptable. The launch MSRP is $199.

The Intel Core 5 315 is a specialized part for mobile systems where power efficiency is paramount. Its 15 W TDP and 3 nm process allow it to achieve a 72nd percentile ranking with a fraction of the power draw. It wins single-thread PassMark by 14.1%, making it responsive for everyday tasks. The single-channel memory bus and 6 MB L3 cache limit its performance in memory-intensive workloads, and the 6-thread limit caps its multicore potential. The launch MSRP is $340.

The choice depends entirely on the use case. A desktop user running rendering, compilation, or data processing should select the i5-12400 without hesitation. A mobile user who needs long battery life and adequate single-thread performance will find the Core 5 315 sufficient. The i5-12400 is the stronger overall chip; the Core 5 315 is the more efficient one. The benchmarks show no scenario where the Core 5 315 outperforms the i5-12400 in sustained multicore work.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The Intel Core i5-12400 has 12 threads, while the Intel Core 5 315 has 6 threads. Both have 6 cores.

Q: How large is the Cinebench R23 multicore gap?

A: The i5-12400 scores 15989 versus 12981 for the Core 5 315, a 23.2% advantage for the i5-12400.

Q: Does the Core 5 315 win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, it wins PassMark single-thread (4021 vs 3456, 14.1% ahead), PassMark physics (1163 vs 1105, 5% ahead), and PassMark prime number finding (112 vs 68, 39.3% ahead).

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The i5-12400 uses a 10 nm process, while the Core 5 315 uses a 3 nm process.

Q: Which processor supports more PCIe lanes?

A: The i5-12400 provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the Core 5 315 provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes.

Q: What is the TDP of each processor?

A: The i5-12400 has a 65 W TDP, and the Core 5 315 has a 15 W TDP.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-12400 | Intel Core 5 315 |

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

| Series | Core 12th Gen | Not specified |

| Threads | 12 | 6 |

| Base Clock | 2.50 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.40 GHz | 4.40 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 15 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 1516 |

| Architecture | Alder Lake | Not specified |

| Codename | Alder Lake-S | Wildcat Lake |

| Generation | Core i5 (Alder Lake-S) | Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Die Size | 163 mm² | Not specified |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB |

| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB |

| L3 Cache | 18 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Single-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not specified | 59.7 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 6 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2022-01-03 | 2026-04-15 |

| Launch MSRP | $199 | $340 |

| Part Number | SRL4VSRL5Y | SAEFC |