Intel Core i7-12800H vs Intel Core i9-11900 Comparison

The Intel Core i9-11900 and Intel Core i7-12800H are two processors that occupy very different positions in Intel’s lineup, yet their average benchmark scores land within 0.3% of each other. The i9-11900, a desktop Rocket Lake part, posts an average score of 32,226, while the mobile Alder Lake-H i7-12800H achieves 32,121. This near-parity in overall performance masks significant differences in architecture, power envelope, and workload-specific strengths. The data shows a split decision: the i9-11900 wins 6 head-to-head benchmarks, while the i7-12800H takes 11. Understanding which processor wins where requires examining the underlying architectural choices and the specific benchmark workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i9-11900 holds a marginal edge, with an average benchmark score of 32,226 compared to the i7-12800H’s 32,121. This represents a delta of 0.3% in favor of the desktop part.

Q: How do the two processors compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core performance?

A: The i9-11900 is decisively ahead, scoring 18,985 versus the i7-12800H’s 15,283. This is a 24.2% advantage for the Rocket Lake desktop processor in this rendering workload.

Q: Which chip wins in single-core Cinebench R20?

A: The i7-12800H takes the lead, posting a score of 1,194 against the i9-11900’s 1,125. The mobile chip holds a 5.8% advantage in this test.

Q: What is the difference in core and thread counts?

A: The i7-12800H has 14 cores and 20 threads, while the i9-11900 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Alder Lake part leverages a hybrid architecture to deliver more parallel resources.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The i9-11900 boosts up to 5.20 GHz, which is higher than the i7-12800H’s 4.80 GHz maximum boost clock.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. Both the i9-11900 and the i7-12800H have their multipliers locked, meaning neither offers user-unlocked overclocking.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is substantial. The i9-11900 is built on Intel’s Rocket Lake architecture, which uses a 14 nm process node and is fabricated in-house by Intel. Its die size is 276 mm². In contrast, the i7-12800H is based on Alder Lake-H, manufactured on a 10 nm node, also by Intel, with a smaller die size of 217 mm².

The core configurations diverge sharply. The i9-11900 is a traditional 8-core, 16-thread design with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The i7-12800H, however, uses a hybrid architecture with 14 cores and 20 threads. Its base clock is 2.40 GHz and boost reaches 4.80 GHz. The i7-12800H’s cache hierarchy also differs: it features 80 KB of L1 per core and 1.25 MB of L2 per core, compared to the i9-11900’s 64 KB and 512 KB per core. The L3 cache is larger on the mobile part, at 24 MB shared versus 16 MB shared on the desktop chip.

Memory support is another differentiator. The i9-11900 supports only DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with a specified memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. The i7-12800H supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, also dual-channel, though its memory bandwidth is not specified. Both processors offer PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics differ as well: the i9-11900 includes UHD Graphics 750, while the i7-12800H is equipped with Iris Xe 96EU.

The market positioning is clear from the specs. The i9-11900 is a desktop processor on the Intel Socket 1200 platform, with a TDP of 65 watts. The i7-12800H is a mobile processor on the Intel BGA 1744 socket, with a lower TDP of 45 watts. The production status also differs: the i9-11900 is end-of-life, while the i7-12800H is still active.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results reveal a clear pattern of workload-dependent performance. The i9-11900 dominates in Cinebench R23, both multi-core and single-core. In multi-core, it scores 18,985 against the i7-12800H’s 15,283, a 24.2% advantage. The single-core gap is even larger: 2,680 versus 1,828, a 46.6% lead for the desktop chip. These are the two biggest wins in the entire comparison.

However, the i7-12800H fights back in other Cinebench versions. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the mobile chip scores 2,222 versus 1,913 for the i9-11900, a 13.9% margin. In Cinebench R20, the i7-12800H wins both multi-core (8,463 versus 7,973, a 5.8% lead) and single-core (1,194 versus 1,125, also 5.8%).

The Passmark suite shows a similar split. The i9-11900 wins data compression (285,159 versus 273,247, a 4.4% edge), extended instructions (19,654 versus 16,408, a 19.8% lead), and random string sorting (33,054 versus 30,453, an 8.5% margin). The i7-12800H counters with wins in data encryption (16,234 versus 13,942, a 14.1% advantage), find prime numbers (102 versus 63, a 38.2% margin), floating point math (60,961 versus 48,948, a 19.7% lead), and integer math (86,488 versus 83,893, a 3% edge). The mobile chip also wins Passmark multithread (24,346 versus 22,456, a 7.8% lead) and Passmark single-thread (3,440 versus 3,373, a 1.9% margin). Passmark physics goes decisively to the i7-12800H, with 1,682 versus 977, a 41.9% advantage.

The wins are not evenly distributed. The i9-11900’s victories are concentrated in single-core Cinebench R23 and in specific Passmark workloads like extended instructions, where its 19.8% lead suggests a strong advantage in SIMD or specialized instruction processing. The i7-12800H, meanwhile, excels in multi-threaded and physics-heavy workloads, leveraging its additional cores and threads.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification category. The i9-11900 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the i7-12800H has 14 cores and 20 threads. Base clocks are close, at 2.50 GHz for the i9-11900 and 2.40 GHz for the i7-12800H, but the boost clocks diverge: 5.20 GHz versus 4.80 GHz. The TDP is significantly different, with the desktop part rated at 65 watts and the mobile part at 45 watts.

Socket and market segment differ fundamentally. The i9-11900 uses Intel Socket 1200 and is a desktop processor, while the i7-12800H uses Intel BGA 1744 and is a mobile processor. The process node advances from 14 nm on Rocket Lake to 10 nm on Alder Lake, with die sizes of 276 mm² and 217 mm² respectively.

Cache configurations are distinct. The i9-11900 has 64 KB L1 per core and 512 KB L2 per core, while the i7-12800H has 80 KB L1 per core and 1.25 MB L2 per core. L3 cache is 16 MB shared on the i9-11900 versus 24 MB shared on the i7-12800H. Memory support is another differentiator: the i9-11900 is limited to DDR4, while the i7-12800H supports both DDR4 and DDR5. The i9-11900 specifies a memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s, while the i7-12800H leaves this unspecified.

Integrated graphics differ, with UHD Graphics 750 on the i9-11900 and Iris Xe 96EU on the i7-12800H. The release dates are also different, with the i9-11900 released on 2021-03-15 and the i7-12800H having no listed release date. The i9-11900 has a launch MSRP of $439, while the i7-12800H has no launch MSRP listed. Production statuses are opposite: the i9-11900 is end-of-life, while the i7-12800H is active.

Where Each One Wins

The i9-11900 is the clear winner in single-threaded Cinebench R23 performance. Its 46.6% lead over the i7-12800H in that benchmark is the largest margin in the entire comparison. This makes it the better choice for workloads that rely heavily on a single core’s maximum boost clock. The desktop chip also wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core, with a 24.2% advantage, suggesting that its 5.20 GHz boost clock provides a significant edge in this particular rendering test despite having fewer cores. For data compression, extended instructions, and random string sorting, the i9-11900 also holds advantages of 4.4%, 19.8%, and 8.5% respectively.

The i7-12800H wins where core count and thread count matter more than raw clock speed. Its 38.2% lead in find prime numbers and 41.9% lead in Passmark physics are the strongest evidence of this. The mobile chip also excels in floating point math, with a 19.7% advantage, and data encryption, with a 14.1% lead. In Cinebench R15 and R20, the i7-12800H consistently outperforms the i9-11900, with multi-core wins of 13.9% and 5.8% respectively. The single-core Cinebench R20 result also favors the i7-12800H by 5.8%, and the Passmark single-thread test shows a 1.9% edge for the mobile part.

For overall multithreaded performance, the i7-12800H wins Passmark multithread by 7.8%. This aligns with its 14 cores and 20 threads, which provide more parallel execution resources than the i9-11900’s 8 cores and 16 threads. The i7-12800H also wins integer math by 3%, a modest but consistent advantage.

The use-case split is clear. The i9-11900 is the pick for applications that benefit from high single-core clocks, such as lightly threaded legacy software or specific Cinebench R23 workloads. The i7-12800H is better for heavily parallel tasks, physics simulations, and encryption, where its additional cores provide a tangible benefit. Given the near-identical average scores, the choice between them depends entirely on whether the target workload favors boost clock or core count.