PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

Core i5-12400F

2022

Why buy it

✅Costs $218 less on MSRP ($174 MSRP vs $392 MSRP).
✅Delivers 68.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 112.3 vs 66.7 PassMark/$ ($174 MSRP vs $392 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i7-14701E.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-14701E across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (19,532 vs 26,146).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (18 MB vs 33 MB).
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-14701E can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i7-14701E

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +23.5% higher average FPS across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+83.3% larger total L3 cache (33 MB vs 18 MB).
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 770, while Core i5-12400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 66.7 vs 112.3 PassMark/$ ($392 MSRP vs $174 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-12400F.

Core i5-12400F

2022

Core i7-14701E

2024

Why buy it

✅Costs $218 less on MSRP ($174 MSRP vs $392 MSRP).
✅Delivers 68.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 112.3 vs 66.7 PassMark/$ ($174 MSRP vs $392 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i7-14701E.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +23.5% higher average FPS across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+83.3% larger total L3 cache (33 MB vs 18 MB).
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 770, while Core i5-12400F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-14701E across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (19,532 vs 26,146).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (18 MB vs 33 MB).
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-14701E can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 66.7 vs 112.3 PassMark/$ ($392 MSRP vs $174 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-12400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-14701E better than Core i5-12400F?

Yes. Core i7-14701E is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 23.5% average FPS lead across 6 shared CPU game tests in our data, 33.9% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i7-14701E is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 23.5% more average FPS across 6 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i7-14701E is the better fit. You are getting 33.9% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 83.3% larger total L3 cache (33 MB vs 18 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core i7-14701E is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-12400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Core i7-14701E is 125.3% more expensive on MSRP at $392 MSRP versus $174 MSRP, and it gives you a 23.5% average FPS lead across 6 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-12400F is also 68.3% better value on MSRP (112.3 vs 66.7 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core i7-14701E is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2022), 83.3% larger total L3 cache (33 MB vs 18 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 8 cores / 16 threads instead of 6/12. That extra compute headroom should age better as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Core i5-12400F Benchmark Check

Core i7-14701E Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-12400F	Core i7-14701E
1080p
low	183 FPS	269 FPS
medium	168 FPS	252 FPS
high	139 FPS	211 FPS
ultra	119 FPS	183 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	252 FPS
medium	132 FPS	213 FPS
high	106 FPS	166 FPS
ultra	89 FPS	148 FPS
4K
low	87 FPS	173 FPS
medium	81 FPS	146 FPS
high	64 FPS	108 FPS
ultra	49 FPS	97 FPS

Open Core i5-12400F Open Core i7-14701E

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-12400F	Core i7-14701E
1080p
low	471 FPS	654 FPS
medium	397 FPS	579 FPS
high	341 FPS	487 FPS
ultra	301 FPS	437 FPS
1440p
low	407 FPS	591 FPS
medium	351 FPS	526 FPS
high	309 FPS	444 FPS
ultra	265 FPS	376 FPS
4K
low	282 FPS	348 FPS
medium	248 FPS	317 FPS
high	229 FPS	299 FPS
ultra	196 FPS	259 FPS

Open Core i5-12400F Open Core i7-14701E

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-12400F	Core i7-14701E
1080p
low	488 FPS	654 FPS
medium	488 FPS	643 FPS
high	488 FPS	562 FPS
ultra	488 FPS	474 FPS
1440p
low	488 FPS	654 FPS
medium	488 FPS	581 FPS
high	485 FPS	500 FPS
ultra	434 FPS	425 FPS
4K
low	442 FPS	500 FPS
medium	389 FPS	425 FPS
high	337 FPS	383 FPS
ultra	274 FPS	323 FPS

Open Core i5-12400F Open Core i7-14701E

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-12400F	Core i7-14701E
1080p
low	488 FPS	654 FPS
medium	488 FPS	654 FPS
high	488 FPS	654 FPS
ultra	488 FPS	654 FPS
1440p
low	488 FPS	654 FPS
medium	488 FPS	654 FPS
high	488 FPS	629 FPS
ultra	473 FPS	556 FPS
4K
low	488 FPS	572 FPS
medium	450 FPS	521 FPS
high	391 FPS	467 FPS
ultra	330 FPS	409 FPS

Open Core i5-12400F Open Core i7-14701E

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-12400F and Core i7-14701E

Core i5-12400F

The Core i5-12400F is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 January 2022 (3 years ago). It is based on the Alder Lake-S (2022) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 4.4 GHz. L3 cache: 18 MB (total). L2 cache: 1.25 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 19,532 points. Launch price was $180.

Core i7-14701E

The Core i7-14701E is manufactured by Intel. It was released in Julho 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Raptor Lake-R (2023−2025) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 5.4 GHz. L3 cache: 33 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4, DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 26,146 points. Launch price was $299.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-12400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core i7-14701E offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Core i7-14701E has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.4 GHz on the Core i5-12400F versus 5.4 GHz on the Core i7-14701E — a 20.4% clock advantage for the Core i7-14701E (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2.6 GHz). The Core i5-12400F uses the Alder Lake-S (2022) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Core i7-14701E uses Raptor Lake-R (2023−2025) (10 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-12400F scores 19,532 against the Core i7-14701E's 26,146 — a 29% lead for the Core i7-14701E. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,700 vs 2,781, a 48.2% lead for the Core i7-14701E that directly translates to higher frame rates. L3 cache: 18 MB (total) on the Core i5-12400F vs 33 MB (total) on the Core i7-14701E.

Feature	Core i5-12400F	Core i7-14701E
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	8 / 16+33%
Boost Clock	4.4 GHz	5.4 GHz+23%
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	2.6 GHz+4%
L3 Cache	18 MB (total)	33 MB (total)+83%
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)	2 MB (per core)+60%
Process	Intel 7 nm-30%	10 nm
Architecture	Alder Lake-S (2022)	Raptor Lake-R (2023−2025)
PassMark	19,532	26,146+34%
Cinebench R23 Multi	12,380	—
Geekbench 6 Single	1,700	2,781+64%
Geekbench 6 Multi	657	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

Both processors use the LGA1700 socket with PCIe 3.0. Both support up to DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 memory speed. The Core i7-14701E supports up to 192 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 40% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 20 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-12400F) and Intel 600 Series,Intel 700 Series (Core i7-14701E).

Feature	Core i5-12400F	Core i7-14701E
Socket	LGA1700	LGA1700
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 5.0+67%
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200	DDR5-5600
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	192 GB+50%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	20

🔧

Advanced Features

Both support VT-x, VT-d, EPT virtualization. The Core i7-14701E includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 770), while the Core i5-12400F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-12400F targets Gaming Performance/Value, Core i7-14701E targets Embedded/Industrial. Direct competitor: Core i5-12400F rivals Ryzen 5 5600; Core i7-14701E rivals Ryzen Embedded 8000.

Feature	Core i5-12400F	Core i7-14701E
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	UHD Graphics 770
Unlocked	—	No
AVX-512	—	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d, EPT	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	Gaming Performance/Value	Embedded/Industrial

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-12400F launched at $174 MSRP, while the Core i7-14701E debuted at $392. On MSRP ($174 vs $392), the Core i5-12400F is $218 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-12400F delivers 112.3 pts/$ vs 66.7 pts/$ for the Core i7-14701E — making the Core i5-12400F the 50.9% better value option.