
Core i5-12400F
Popular choices:

EPYC 7262
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
About PassMark
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
2022Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +4.1% higher average FPS across 28 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 155W, a 90W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 7262.
Trade-offs
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (18 MB vs 32 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7262, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $174 MSRP, while EPYC 7262 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
EPYC 7262
2019Why buy it
- ✅+77.8% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 18 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 8 cores / 16 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-12400F across 28 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (11,500 vs 12,380).
- ❌138.5% higher power demand at 155W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while Core i5-12400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-12400F.
Core i5-12400F
2022EPYC 7262
2019Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +4.1% higher average FPS across 28 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 155W, a 90W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 7262.
Why buy it
- ✅+77.8% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 18 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 8 cores / 16 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (18 MB vs 32 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7262, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $174 MSRP, while EPYC 7262 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-12400F across 28 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (11,500 vs 12,380).
- ❌138.5% higher power demand at 155W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while Core i5-12400F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-12400F.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i5-12400F better than EPYC 7262?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Games Benchmarks
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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 7262 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 183 FPS | 150 FPS |
| medium | 168 FPS | 123 FPS |
| high | 139 FPS | 105 FPS |
| ultra | 119 FPS | 85 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 130 FPS |
| medium | 132 FPS | 105 FPS |
| high | 106 FPS | 85 FPS |
| ultra | 89 FPS | 68 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 87 FPS | 63 FPS |
| medium | 81 FPS | 54 FPS |
| high | 64 FPS | 42 FPS |
| ultra | 49 FPS | 34 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 7262 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 471 FPS | 356 FPS |
| medium | 397 FPS | 314 FPS |
| high | 341 FPS | 262 FPS |
| ultra | 301 FPS | 213 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 407 FPS | 302 FPS |
| medium | 351 FPS | 276 FPS |
| high | 309 FPS | 235 FPS |
| ultra | 265 FPS | 188 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 282 FPS | 194 FPS |
| medium | 248 FPS | 178 FPS |
| high | 229 FPS | 153 FPS |
| ultra | 196 FPS | 123 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 7262 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 519 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 519 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 465 FPS |
| ultra | 488 FPS | 408 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 496 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 403 FPS |
| high | 485 FPS | 353 FPS |
| ultra | 434 FPS | 306 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 442 FPS | 359 FPS |
| medium | 389 FPS | 280 FPS |
| high | 337 FPS | 239 FPS |
| ultra | 274 FPS | 192 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 7262 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 519 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 519 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 519 FPS |
| ultra | 488 FPS | 519 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 519 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 519 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 510 FPS |
| ultra | 473 FPS | 438 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 488 FPS | 465 FPS |
| medium | 450 FPS | 419 FPS |
| high | 391 FPS | 372 FPS |
| ultra | 330 FPS | 325 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-12400F and EPYC 7262

Core i5-12400F
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.

EPYC 7262
EPYC 7262
The EPYC 7262 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 7 August 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Zen 2 (2017−2020) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm, 14 nm process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 155 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Eight-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 20,779 points. Launch price was $575.
Processing Power
The Core i5-12400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the EPYC 7262 offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the EPYC 7262 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.4 GHz on the Core i5-12400F versus 3.4 GHz on the EPYC 7262 — a 25.6% clock advantage for the Core i5-12400F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 3.2 GHz). The Core i5-12400F uses the Alder Lake-S (2022) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the EPYC 7262 uses Zen 2 (2017−2020) (7 nm, 14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-12400F scores 19,532 against the EPYC 7262's 20,779 — a 6.2% lead for the EPYC 7262. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 12,380 vs 11,500 (7.4% advantage for the Core i5-12400F). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,700 vs 1,346, a 23.2% lead for the Core i5-12400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 657 vs 7,900 (169.3% advantage for the EPYC 7262). L3 cache: 18 MB (total) on the Core i5-12400F vs 32 MB (total) on the EPYC 7262.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 7262 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 8 / 16+33% |
| Boost Clock | 4.4 GHz+29% | 3.4 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz | 3.2 GHz+28% |
| L3 Cache | 18 MB (total) | 32 MB (total)+78% |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core)+150% | 512 kB (per core) |
| Process | Intel 7 nm | 7 nm, 14 nm |
| Architecture | Alder Lake-S (2022) | Zen 2 (2017−2020) |
| PassMark | 19,532 | 20,779+6% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 12,380+8% | 11,500 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,700+26% | 1,346 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 657 | 7,900+1102% |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-12400F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the EPYC 7262 uses SP3 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200 on the Core i5-12400F versus DDR4-3200 on the EPYC 7262 — the Core i5-12400F supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 7262 supports up to 4096 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 187.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-12400F) vs 8 (EPYC 7262). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i5-12400F) vs 128 (EPYC 7262) — the EPYC 7262 offers 108 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H610,B660,H670,Z690,B760,H770,Z790 (Core i5-12400F) and SP3,Rome (EPYC 7262).
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 7262 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | SP3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 4.0+33% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200+25% | DDR4-3200 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB | 4096 GB+3100% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 8+300% |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | 128+540% |
Advanced Features
Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i5-12400F) vs AMD-V, SEV (EPYC 7262). Primary use case: Core i5-12400F targets Gaming Performance/Value, EPYC 7262 targets Budget Server / Multi-thread computing. Direct competitor: Core i5-12400F rivals Ryzen 5 5600; EPYC 7262 rivals Xeon Silver 4216.
| Feature | Core i5-12400F | EPYC 7262 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d, EPT | AMD-V, SEV |
| Target Use | Gaming Performance/Value | Budget Server / Multi-thread computing |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












