Intel Core i3-13100F vs Intel Core i5-12450H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark comparison between the Intel Core i3-13100F and the Intel Core i5-12450H reveals a clear split: the i5-12450H wins the majority of tests with 11 victories, while the i3-13100F takes 6. The most dramatic gap appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the i3-13100F scores 12,458 against the i5-12450H’s 8,822.5, a 41.2% advantage. This is the single largest margin in either direction across all recorded tests, and it underscores that the desktop part’s sustained multi-threaded throughput can exceed that of the mobile chip despite the i5 having more cores and threads.

The i5-12450H counters with a strong showing in the older Cinebench R15 and R20 multi-core tests. It leads by 7% in R15 multi-core (1,350 vs. 1,255) and by 7.7% in R20 multi-core (5,671 vs. 5,232). It also wins Cinebench R15 single-core by 25.6% (238 vs. 177) and R20 single-core by 7.7% (800 vs. 738). These are notable because they show the i5-12450H’s single-core performance in those specific workloads is not just competitive but decisively ahead.

However, the i3-13100F reclaims the single-core crown in newer tests. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 1,758 versus 1,661, a 5.8% lead. In PassMark single-thread, the i3-13100F posts 3,609 against 3,306, a 9.2% edge. The same 9.2% margin appears in the duplicated PassMark singlethread test. This pattern suggests that the i3-13100F’s higher boost clock of 4.50 GHz, compared to 4.40 GHz on the i5-12450H, helps in workloads that are sensitive to peak frequency.

The PassMark suite provides additional context. The i5-12450H wins data compression by 13.9% (195,132 vs. 168,043), data encryption by 21.6% (10,832 vs. 8,496), extended instructions by 4.9% (11,992 vs. 11,407), floating point math by 17.4% (40,568 vs. 33,510), integer math by 21.4% (54,782 vs. 43,038), multithread by 9.7% (16,265 vs. 14,687), and random string sorting by 20.5% (20,838 vs. 16,569). These wins are spread across different types of compute, indicating that the i5-12450H’s 8 cores and 12 threads handle parallel integer and floating-point workloads effectively.

The i3-13100F has two additional wins in PassMark: find prime numbers (61 vs. 46, a 32.6% advantage) and physics (1,055 vs. 883, a 19.5% edge). The prime number test, which is often sensitive to single-thread efficiency and clock speed, rewards the i3-13100F heavily. The physics test, which simulates rigid body physics, also favors the desktop part.

Overall, the head-to-head data shows a tradeoff. The i5-12450H is faster in most multi-threaded and memory-intensive tasks, while the i3-13100F excels in specific single-threaded and certain specialized workloads. The average benchmark scores reflect this: the i3-13100F has an average score of 17,653, slightly above the i5-12450H’s 17,239. Both sit at the 71st percentile among all CPUs, meaning they are statistically comparable in overall standing.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher single-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core i3-13100F scores 1,758, which is 5.8% higher than the Intel Core i5-12450H’s 1,661.

Q: How large is the multi-core lead for the i5-12450H in Cinebench R20?

A: The i5-12450H scores 5,671, which is 7.7% ahead of the i3-13100F’s 5,232.

Q: In which test does the i3-13100F show its biggest advantage?

A: The i3-13100F leads by 41.2% in Cinebench R23 multi-core, scoring 12,458 versus 8,822.5 for the i5-12450H.

Q: Does the i5-12450H win any PassMark tests?

A: Yes, it wins seven PassMark tests: data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, floating point math, integer math, multithread, and random string sorting.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two?

A: The i3-13100F averages 17,653, while the i5-12450H averages 17,239, a difference of 414 points in favor of the i3-13100F.

Q: Are both CPUs in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both are at the 71st percentile among all CPUs, indicating similar overall standing despite their different benchmark wins.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different generations and are built for different platforms. The Intel Core i3-13100F is based on Raptor Lake, specifically the Raptor Lake-S die, while the Intel Core i5-12450H uses Alder Lake, specifically the Alder Lake-H die. Both are manufactured on a 10 nm process at Intel, but the die sizes differ: the i3-13100F measures 163 mm², while the i5-12450H measures 217 mm². The larger die on the i5-12450H accommodates additional cores and the integrated GPU.

The core configurations diverge sharply. The i3-13100F has 4 cores and 8 threads, a traditional desktop layout. The i5-12450H has 8 cores and 12 threads, which implies a hybrid arrangement with performance and efficiency cores, though the database does not specify the exact split. This explains why the i5-12450H wins many multi-threaded tests despite having a lower base clock of 2.00 GHz versus the i3-13100F’s 3.40 GHz. The i5-12450H’s boost clock of 4.40 GHz is slightly lower than the i3-13100F’s 4.50 GHz, which correlates with the i3-13100F’s wins in high-frequency-sensitive tests.

Cache hierarchies are identical in structure: both have 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The L3 capacity is the same, but the distribution across cores differs due to the different core counts. The i5-12450H spreads the same 12 MB across more cores, while the i3-13100F has fewer cores sharing the same pool.

Memory support is the same: both support DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode. Neither supports ECC memory. The PCIe interface differs: the i3-13100F uses Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the i5-12450H uses Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). This makes the desktop part more forward-looking for storage and GPU bandwidth.

A major architectural difference is the integrated graphics. The i3-13100F has none, as indicated by the null field, while the i5-12450H includes UHD Graphics. This is expected given the i3-13100F’s “F” designation, which denotes a disabled graphics unit. The i5-12450H, being a mobile chip, integrates graphics for laptop use.

Process node, foundry, and transistor count are not fully specified. The database lists 10 nm for both and Intel as the foundry. Transistor counts are null for both. The production status is active for both, meaning neither is discontinued.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs differ in several key specifications beyond their names. The i3-13100F belongs to the Core 13th Gen series, while the i5-12450H belongs to the Core 12th Gen series. Their generations are listed as “Core i3 (Raptor Lake)” and “Core i5 (Alder Lake-H)” respectively.

Core and thread counts differ: 4 cores and 8 threads for the i3-13100F versus 8 cores and 12 threads for the i5-12450H. Base clocks are very different: 3.40 GHz for the i3-13100F versus 2.00 GHz for the i5-12450H. Boost clocks are closer: 4.50 GHz versus 4.40 GHz.

Thermal design power (TDP) differs: the i3-13100F is rated at 58 watts, while the i5-12450H is rated at 45 watts. This reflects the desktop versus mobile market segmentation. The socket is also different: Intel Socket 1700 for the i3-13100F versus Intel BGA 1744 for the i5-12450H.

The die size is 163 mm² for the i3-13100F and 217 mm² for the i5-12450H. The PCIe generation differs: Gen 5 for the i3-13100F, Gen 4 for the i5-12450H. Integrated graphics presence differs: none for the i3-13100F, UHD Graphics for the i5-12450H.

Market segments differ: the i3-13100F is desktop, the i5-12450H is mobile. Release dates differ: the i3-13100F has a release date of January 3, 2023, while the i5-12450H has no recorded release date. The launch MSRP for the i3-13100F is $109, while the i5-12450H has no launch MSRP listed.

Part numbers differ: SRMBV for the i3-13100F, SRLCX for the i5-12450H. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. L1, L2, and L3 cache values are the same, as are memory support and memory bus. Both are dual-channel, both support DDR4 and DDR5, and both have the same per-core cache sizes.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward conclusion: the Intel Core i5-12450H is the better all-round performer in most multi-threaded and memory-heavy workloads, while the Intel Core i3-13100F is superior in specific single-threaded and certain specialized tests. The i5-12450H wins 11 of 17 head-to-head tests, with particularly strong showings in PassMark integer math (21.4% ahead), data encryption (21.6% ahead), and random string sorting (20.5% ahead). It also wins Cinebench R15 and R20 multi-core, plus R15 and R20 single-core.

However, the i3-13100F’s 41.2% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core is a striking outlier. That test is often used as a proxy for sustained all-core rendering performance, and the desktop part’s higher base clock appears to compensate for its fewer cores in that workload. The i3-13100F also wins PassMark single-thread by 9.2% and PassMark physics by 19.5%, indicating that applications relying on high frequency rather than high core count will favor it.

For a user who prioritizes a single metric, the choice depends on which benchmark matters most. For general productivity, the i5-12450H’s broader wins across compression, encryption, floating-point, and integer math make it the safer pick. For workloads that resemble Cinebench R23 multi-core or prime number calculations, the i3-13100F is clearly ahead.

The average benchmark scores are nearly identical, with the i3-13100F at 17,653 and the i5-12450H at 17,239. Both are at the 71st percentile, so neither is dramatically faster overall. The i5-12450H’s integrated graphics is a functional advantage for systems without a discrete GPU, while the i3-13100F requires a separate graphics card.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-12450H wins in scenarios that benefit from more cores and threads. Its 8 cores and 12 threads drive victories in data compression, data encryption, floating-point math, integer math, multithread, and random string sorting. These are typical of productivity tasks, database operations, and content creation that can parallelize across cores. The i5-12450H also wins Cinebench R15 and R20 multi-core, suggesting it handles older rendering workloads well. Its integrated UHD Graphics means it can power a display without a discrete GPU, which is relevant for mobile systems.

The Intel Core i3-13100F wins in scenarios where clock speed and per-core efficiency dominate. It leads in Cinebench R23 multi-core by a wide margin, which is notable because that test is newer and may better reflect modern instruction-level parallelism. It also wins PassMark single-thread, PassMark singlethread, PassMark physics, and PassMark find prime numbers. These are tests that reward high boost clocks and low latency per core. The i3-13100F’s 4.50 GHz boost clock, higher than the i5-12450H’s 4.40 GHz, is likely a factor.

For desktop users building a system with a discrete GPU, the i3-13100F’s Gen 5 PCIe support offers newer connectivity options. Its smaller die size and lower core count may also imply lower power draw under certain conditions, though TDP figures show the i3-13100F at 58 watts versus 45 watts for the i5-12450H, so the mobile chip is rated lower.

For laptop users or those needing an all-in-one solution, the i5-12450H’s integrated graphics and lower TDP make it suitable for portable systems. Its higher core count provides more consistent multi-threaded performance across a wide range of tasks, even if its base clock is much lower.

The final selection should be based on the intended workload. If the priority is peak single-thread performance and specific rendering tests like Cinebench R23, the i3-13100F is the data-backed choice. If the priority is broad multi-threaded throughput across many different benchmark types, the i5-12450H wins more tests and offers integrated graphics. The database records both at the same percentile, so the decision comes down to which benchmark suite matches the user’s real applications.