Intel Core i3-12100F vs Intel Core i5-10400F Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear split between these two processors. The Intel Core i3-12100F wins 19 of the 25 head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core i5-10400F takes 6. The most striking difference appears in single-threaded workloads, where the i3-12100F leads by substantial margins. In 3dmark_single_thread, the i3-12100F scores 893 against 688 for the i5-10400F, a 23% advantage. Geekbench_singlecore shows an even larger gap: 1932 versus 1420, which works out to a 26.5% lead. Passmark_single_thread confirms the trend with 3444 against 2541, again a 26.2% difference.

The i3-12100F also wins in multi-threaded tests despite having fewer cores and threads. Cinebench R23 multicore shows 11860 for the i3 against 10283 for the i5, a 13.3% edge. Geekbench_multicore follows the same pattern: 7252 versus 6257, a 13.7% lead. Passmark_multithread shows 14015 against 12115, a 13.6% advantage. This is notable because the i5-10400F has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the i3-12100F has only 4 cores and 8 threads.

The i5-10400F does post wins in several specific workloads. The largest is passmark_random_string_sorting, where it scores 23185 against 15809, a 46.7% advantage. Passmark_data_compression goes to the i5 with 185944 versus 160452, a 15.9% lead. Passmark_extended_instructions shows 12500 against 10842, a 15.3% win. Passmark_integer_math is close: 41471 against 40978, just 1.2% ahead. In 3dmark_16_threads, the i5 scores 4748 versus 4051, a 17.2% win, and in 3dmark_max_threads it leads 4735 to 4023, a 17.7% margin.

The biggest single loss for the i5-10400F comes in passmark_data_encryption, where the i3-12100F scores 8071 against 4100, a 49.2% difference. Passmark_find_prime_numbers also favors the i3 strongly: 60 versus 35, a 41.7% gap. Passmark_physics shows 985 versus 696, a 29.3% i3 lead.

Where Each One Wins

The i3-12100F dominates in everyday responsiveness and lightly threaded applications. Its single-core performance is decisively better across every benchmark that measures it. The 3dmark_2_threads result of 1659 against 1350, an 18.6% lead, indicates strong performance in tasks that use just a couple of threads. The 3dmark_4_threads score of 2859 versus 2560 (10.5% ahead) shows this extends to quad-thread workloads as well. For gaming, office work, web browsing, and any application that relies heavily on one or two cores, the data points clearly to the i3.

The i5-10400F shows its strengths in more specialized workloads. Its 46.7% win in random string sorting suggests an advantage in sorting algorithms and data organization tasks. The 15.9% lead in data compression indicates better throughput for compression tools. The 15.3% win in extended instructions points to an edge in workloads using newer instruction sets. The 3dmark_16_threads and max_threads wins indicate better scaling when all threads are saturated, which matters for rendering or batch processing that can use every available thread.

The i3 wins in the vast majority of multi-threaded tests too, which complicates the picture. Cinebench R20 multicore shows 4981 versus 4318 (13.3% ahead), and the R15 and R23 versions show the same 13.3% gap. The i3 even wins passmark_multithread by 13.6%. This means the i3 is not just a single-core specialist; it outperforms the i5 in most mixed workloads. The i5 only pulls ahead in the specific tasks where its extra cores and threads can be fully utilized, such as the 16-thread and max-thread 3dmark tests and the data compression and string sorting benchmarks.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations with fundamentally different designs. The i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake architecture on a 14 nm process node. The i3-12100F uses the Alder Lake architecture on a 10 nm process node. The process shrink is a major factor in the performance differences, as it allows for higher clock speeds and better efficiency per watt.

The i5-10400F has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the i3-12100F has 4 cores and 8 threads. The base clock of the i5 is 2.90 GHz, while the i3 starts at 3.30 GHz. Both have the same boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The higher base clock of the i3 partially explains its strong single-thread performance, but the architectural improvements in Alder Lake go beyond clock speed.

Cache configurations differ significantly. The i5-10400F has 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core. The i3-12100F has 80 KB of L1 per core and a much larger 1.25 MB of L2 per core. Both have 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger L2 cache in the i3 helps with data locality and reduces latency for frequently accessed data.

The i5-10400F has a TDP of 65 watts, while the i3-12100F has a TDP of 58 watts. The i3 manages to deliver better performance across most benchmarks while consuming less power, a direct benefit of the newer process node.

The socket situation is a critical practical difference. The i5-10400F uses Intel Socket 1200, while the i3-12100F uses Intel Socket 1700. These are not interchangeable, so a motherboard upgrade is required when moving between these platforms.

Specification Differences

The i5-10400F and i3-12100F differ in several key specifications. Core count: 6 versus 4. Thread count: 12 versus 8. Base clock: 2.90 GHz versus 3.30 GHz. Boost clock: both 4.30 GHz, no difference there. TDP: 65 watts versus 58 watts. Socket: Intel Socket 1200 versus Intel Socket 1700.

Memory support differs as well. The i5-10400F supports DDR4 only, while the i3-12100F supports both DDR4 and DDR5. Both use a dual-channel memory bus. The i5 has a listed memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, while the i3 does not have a memory bandwidth figure in the database.

PCIe support is another major difference. The i5-10400F provides PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The i3-12100F provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). This means the i3 platform supports much faster storage and expansion cards if the motherboard and other components also support PCIe Gen 5.

The die size for the i3-12100F is listed as 163 mm², while the i5-10400F does not have a die size recorded. Both processors have no integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU. Both have ECC memory disabled. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. The i3-12100F has a launch MSRP of $97. The i5-10400F does not have a launch MSRP listed in the database.

The part numbers differ: SRH3DSRH79 for the i5-10400F and SRL63 for the i3-12100F. The i5 was released on 2020-04-29, while the i3 has no release date recorded. Both are listed as Active production status.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better single-thread performance?

A: The Intel Core i3-12100F wins every single-thread benchmark. It leads by 23% in 3dmark_single_thread, 26.5% in Geekbench_singlecore, and 26.2% in Passmark_single_thread.

Q: Does the i5-10400F win any multi-threaded benchmarks?

A: Yes. The i5-10400F wins 3dmark_16_threads by 17.2% and 3dmark_max_threads by 17.7%. It also wins passmark_data_compression by 15.9%, passmark_extended_instructions by 15.3%, and passmark_integer_math by 1.2%. However, the i3-12100F wins the Cinebench multicore tests, Geekbench_multicore, and Passmark_multithread by margins around 13%.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i5-10400F has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core i3-12100F has 4 cores and 8 threads. Despite this, the i3 wins most multi-threaded benchmarks due to its architectural advantages.

Q: What is the TDP difference between these two?

A: The i5-10400F has a TDP of 65 watts, while the i3-12100F has a TDP of 58 watts. The i3 delivers better performance across most benchmarks while consuming less power.

Q: Are these processors compatible with the same motherboards?

A: No. The i5-10400F uses Intel Socket 1200, while the i3-12100F uses Intel Socket 1700. A motherboard upgrade is required to switch between these platforms.

Q: Which processor has better memory support?

A: The i3-12100F supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the i5-10400F supports DDR4 only. Both use a dual-channel memory bus. The i5 has a memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, while the i3 does not have a bandwidth figure recorded.

The Verdict

The benchmark data favors the Intel Core i3-12100F in almost every category that matters for typical PC use. It wins 19 of 25 head-to-head comparisons, including all single-thread tests, most multi-thread tests, and the majority of specialized workloads. Its 26.5% lead in Geekbench_singlecore and 26.2% lead in Passmark_single_thread indicate a substantial advantage in everyday applications that rely on single-core performance. The i3 also wins Cinebench R23 multicore by 13.3%, showing that its architectural efficiency overcomes its fewer cores and threads.

The i5-10400F still has a role for specific tasks. Its 46.7% win in random string sorting and 15.9% win in data compression make it the better choice for workloads that depend on those specific operations. Its 17.2% and 17.7% wins in the 3dmark 16-thread and max-thread tests suggest it handles fully saturated thread counts better. If a workflow consists primarily of these tasks, the i5 remains competitive.

The i3-12100F also offers the advantage of PCIe Gen 5 support versus PCIe Gen 3 on the i5, which matters for future storage and expansion capabilities. Its support for both DDR4 and DDR5 memory provides flexibility in platform choice. The lower TDP of 58 watts versus 65 watts means easier cooling requirements.

For a new build, the data points to the i3-12100F as the stronger choice for general use, gaming, and most productivity tasks. The i5-10400F makes sense only for users with workloads specifically matching its few winning benchmarks, particularly data compression, string sorting, and highly parallel 3dmark-style loads. The fact that the i5 uses the older Socket 1200 platform and PCIe Gen 3 further limits its future upgrade path. The i3-12100F wins on performance, efficiency, and platform modernity according to the recorded measurements.