Intel Core i5-12490F vs Intel Core i5-12600T Comparison

The Intel Core i5-12600T and Intel Core i5-12490F are both Alder Lake-S desktop parts with six cores and twelve threads, but they are tuned for opposite ends of the desktop spectrum. The data shows a clear and consistent performance hierarchy between them, with the 12490F winning every single one of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The largest gaps appear in bursty, single-threaded work, while the narrowest gap is in pure integer throughput. This is not a close contest; it is a story of a low-power part versus a full-power part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are unambiguous: the Intel Core i5-12490F leads the 12600T in every measured workload. In Cinebench, the gap is remarkably uniform. The 12490F scores 1742 in Cinebench R15 multi-core versus 1494 for the 12600T, a 14.2% advantage. The single-core R15 result tells a similar story: 245 versus 210, a 14.3% lead. This pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 and R23. In R20, the 12490F posts 7259 multi-core and 1024 single-core, compared to 6225 and 878 for the 12600T — both deficits of roughly 14.2%. The R23 results show the same delta: 17284 versus 14822 multi-core, and 2440 versus 2092 single-core. Across all Cinebench versions, the 12490F holds a steady 14.2–14.3% lead. That uniformity suggests the advantage comes from sustained clock behavior rather than any workload-specific architectural edge.

The picture shifts slightly in PassMark tests. The 12490F wins the single-thread test with 3682 points against 3516 for the 12600T, but the margin shrinks to 4.5%. That is the smallest difference in the entire benchmark set. The multi-thread PassMark score shows a larger gap: 20202 versus 17446, a 13.6% lead. The 12490F also dominates memory-latency-sensitive and encryption workloads. In data compression, it scores 237304 versus 195924, a 17.4% advantage. Data encryption shows a 15.1% lead (12018 versus 10205). Extended instructions, which stress AVX and similar workloads, favor the 12490F by 17.8% — the largest percentage win of any test. Floating-point math and integer math are closer: 47326 versus 42295 (10.6% lead) and 60548 versus 54646 (9.7% lead), respectively. The 12490F also wins physics (1345 versus 1212, a 9.9% lead), random string sorting (23791 versus 20299, a 14.7% lead), and prime number finding (87 versus 76, a 12.6% lead). With 17 wins out of 17 head-to-head comparisons, the 12490F is the outright performance winner.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the Intel Core i5-12490F in multi-core workloads?

A: The 12490F leads by 14.2% in Cinebench R23 multi-core (17284 versus 14822) and by 13.6% in PassMark multi-thread (20202 versus 17446).

Q: Is the single-core performance gap smaller than the multi-core gap?

A: Yes, but only in PassMark. The single-thread PassMark score shows a 4.5% lead for the 12490F (3682 versus 3516). In Cinebench R23 single-core, the gap is 14.3% (2440 versus 2092), matching the multi-core delta.

Q: Which CPU has better memory-related performance?

A: The 12490F wins data compression by 17.4% (237304 versus 195924) and random string sorting by 14.7% (23791 versus 20299). Benchmark results indicate the 12490F handles memory-bound workloads more effectively.

Q: Do the two CPUs have the same integrated graphics?

A: No. The 12600T includes UHD Graphics 770, while the 12490F has no integrated graphics (the "F" suffix). This is a key feature difference for systems without a discrete GPU.

Q: Are both CPUs on the same socket and process node?

A: Yes. Both use Intel Socket 1700, the Alder Lake architecture, and are built on Intel's 10 nm process with a 163 mm² die size.

Q: What is the largest performance margin between the two?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark extended instructions, where the 12490F leads by 17.8% (15993 versus 13140). The smallest is PassMark single-thread at 4.5%.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same fundamental architecture: Alder Lake-S on Intel's 10 nm process, built at Intel's foundry, with a die size of 163 mm². They have identical core and thread counts (6 cores, 12 threads), the same L1 cache of 80 KB per core, and the same L2 cache of 1.25 MB per core. The PCIe configuration is identical: Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. Both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, and neither supports ECC memory. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The differences lie in a few specific fields. The most obvious is the L3 cache: the 12600T has 18 MB shared, while the 12490F has 20 MB shared — a 2 MB advantage for the 12490F. This extra cache likely contributes to its lead in compression and sorting workloads. The base clock differs significantly: the 12600T runs at 2.10 GHz, while the 12490F runs at 3.00 GHz. Both boost to 4.60 GHz, so the single-core ceiling is identical, but the 12490F starts from a much higher baseline. The TDP reflects this: the 12600T is a 35 W part, while the 12490F is a 65 W part. The 12600T includes UHD Graphics 770, whereas the 12490F has no integrated graphics. The part numbers differ (SRL5U for the 12600T, SRL4X for the 12490F), and the launch MSRP for the 12600T is $223, while no launch MSRP is listed for the 12490F.

The Verdict

The data points to one simple conclusion: the Intel Core i5-12490F is the faster processor in every benchmark measured. If performance is the sole criterion, the 12490F is the clear choice. Its 14.2% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 17.8% lead in extended instructions are substantial margins for two otherwise identical six-core parts. The 12490F also holds a 4.5% single-thread advantage in PassMark, which is meaningful for lightly-threaded applications.

The 12600T, however, is not without reason to exist. Its 35 W TDP is nearly half of the 12490F's 65 W TDP, making it a far more power-efficient option for compact or thermally constrained builds. Its base clock of 2.10 GHz versus 3.00 GHz explains the performance gap but also highlights the 12600T's design intent: low-power operation. The inclusion of UHD Graphics 770 is another significant advantage for the 12600T — it can run a display without a discrete GPU, while the 12490F cannot. For a system that needs integrated graphics or minimal power draw, the 12600T is the only viable choice between the two. For everything else, the 12490F wins outright.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-12600T | Intel Core i5-12490F |

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

| Base Clock | 2.10 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| TDP | 35 W | 65 W |

| L3 Cache | 18 MB (shared) | 20 MB (shared) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 770 | None |

| Part Number | SRL5U | SRL4X |

| Launch MSRP | $223 | Not listed |

All other specifications are identical: 6 cores, 12 threads, 4.60 GHz boost clock, Intel Socket 1700, Alder Lake-S architecture, 10 nm process, 163 mm² die size, 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, DDR4/DDR5 dual-channel memory support, no ECC, Gen 5 PCIe with 20 lanes, and a locked multiplier.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-12490F wins in every performance benchmark. Its largest advantages are in extended instructions (17.8% lead), data compression (17.4%), and data encryption (15.1%). These are workloads that benefit from both higher sustained clocks and the extra 2 MB of L3 cache. The 12490F also dominates Cinebench across all versions, making it the better pick for rendering and CPU-bound productivity tasks. Its 4.5% lead in PassMark single-thread is enough to recommend it for general desktop responsiveness, though the margin is modest. If you are building a system with a discrete GPU and want maximum compute throughput, the 12490F is the superior part.

The Intel Core i5-12600T wins in scenarios that are not captured by raw benchmark scores. Its 35 W TDP makes it the obvious choice for small-form-factor builds, silent PCs, or any system with a limited cooling solution. The integrated UHD Graphics 770 means it can serve as a complete desktop platform without a dedicated graphics card, which the 12490F cannot do. The 12600T's lower base clock of 2.10 GHz is a trade-off for that power efficiency, but its 4.60 GHz boost clock ensures it can still reach the same peak single-core speed as the 12490F when needed. For office work, media playback, or a low-power server, the 12600T is the better fit, despite losing every benchmark comparison. The choice between these two is not about performance — the 12490F wins that outright — but about power envelope and integrated graphics requirements.