Entry level Alder Lake: i5-12400 review, the new value king

Grim5 · 15 Dec 2021 at 08:47

picture hosting
[/URL]

https://www.igorslab.de/en/upcoming...12400-in-gaming-tests-saving-without-e-cores/

alec · 15 Dec 2021 at 09:40

Two flaws in that review
Because the donor was 12900K, cores are binned - production 12400 will not be as power efficient.
Also amount of cache is from 12900K, almost double of what is preficted for 12400. Which will be a huge bonus in game benchmarks

But overall, Alder Lake IPC at low price will definitely be a strong showing.

Joxeon · 15 Dec 2021 at 09:57

alec said:
Two flaws in that review
Because the donor was 12900K, cores are binned - production 12400 will not be as power efficient.
Also amount of cache is from 12900K, almost double of what is preficted for 12400. Which will be a huge bonus in game benchmarks

But overall, Alder Lake IPC at low price will definitely be a strong showing.

The donor was a 12600k unless I'm reading incorrectly so only a very small cache difference.

alec · 15 Dec 2021 at 10:04

I stand corrected, was basing off a description of this work in another source

Dave2150 · 15 Dec 2021 at 12:36

Amazing value

mickyflinn · 15 Dec 2021 at 12:55

What is the percent increase in performance compared to the 11400 ?

MrRockliffe · 15 Dec 2021 at 13:11

So just to confirm, the above slides are not an actual 12400f, but a 12600K that has been adjusted in BIOS to closely replicate the specs of a 12400f?

Hopefully the actual results are quite similar, because if they are, it’ll be excellent value. A bit like the 3470 of old

g67575 · 15 Dec 2021 at 14:18

The 12400 does very well at 1080p resolutions and above (beating the 5600X), while the 'E-Cores' on the 12600K add a little extra performance, it's almost not worth bothering with.

Intel should really make an Alder Lake chip with 8 performance cores and no 'E-Cores', as it looks like that's where the price/performance sweet spot would be.

Some impressive 'Watts per frame' statistics too:
https://www.igorslab.de/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/02e-1080p-Efficiency.png

Journey · 15 Dec 2021 at 14:24

It's going to totally cannibalise Intel own 12600K sales for people who only play games, and need to save as much money as possible to put towards the overpriced GPU's. Price wise it looks to land at $178 for 1000/units in the non-F variant, and $166 for the F SKU.

g67575 · 15 Dec 2021 at 14:41

Just 50 watts power usage?

Is this in game?
Link:
https://www.igorslab.de/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/01d-Power-Draw.png

Might actually be able to use one of their new 65 watt stock coolers, if that is the case.

It's only average power usage though, so presumably will spike higher than this.

I think they need at least a 100w stock cooler for the 12700 though.

Joxeon · 15 Dec 2021 at 18:17

mickyflinn said:
What is the percent increase in performance compared to the 11400 ?

Should be around 10-15% in CPU limited gaming.

Ayahuasca · 5 Jan 2022 at 14:19

Pre-orders are up on some sites with a delivery estimate of 5-6 days...

RavenXXX2 · 5 Jan 2022 at 14:27

Lots of retailers have stock, 12400F £179.99, rip 5600x.

humbug · 5 Jan 2022 at 14:42

alec said:
Two flaws in that review
Because the donor was 12900K, cores are binned - production 12400 will not be as power efficient.
Also amount of cache is from 12900K, almost double of what is preficted for 12400. Which will be a huge bonus in game benchmarks

But overall, Alder Lake IPC at low price will definitely be a strong showing.

Wait, he disabled cores to make up a theoretical 12400?

Then its not a 12400, for a start they are a different bin, they might even be a different SKU entirely, for example the 12400 might not be swimming in as much L3 cache as a 12900K with half the cores disabled and be that as it may it makes this test utterly flawed as an over abundance of L3 per core can have a significant effect on performance.

This is click bait. Or he's an idiot, you chose...

NZXT30 · 5 Jan 2022 at 15:03

Some gaming benchmarks https://wccftech.com/review/intel-c...otherboard-undoubtedly-the-new-budget-king/9/

The 5600x is now a £150 chip at best and some retailers have it at over £300, pure madness!

Joxeon · 5 Jan 2022 at 15:57

humbug said:
Wait, he disabled cores to make up a theoretical 12400?

Then its not a 12400, for a start they are a different bin, they might even be a different SKU entirely, for example the 12400 might not be swimming in as much L3 cache as a 12900K with half the cores disabled and be that as it may it makes this test utterly flawed as an over abundance of L3 per core can have a significant effect on performance.

This is click bait. Or he's an idiot, you chose...

He used a 12600k with Ecores disabled and clocks and power limits adjusted to 12400 levels so the cache difference is only 2mb.

jigger · 5 Jan 2022 at 16:03

Intel H670 motherboard. £100~
Intel 12400F CPU. £170~
Intel Arc A380 Graphics card. £199~

Basic PSU. £35
MIDI Case with a pair of fans. £50
1tb SSD. £70
Artic freezer 7. £15

Could be the new 1920x1080 weapon of choice for gamers.

I can see Intel gaining some of OEM sales with slot powered graphics card, sub 50watt CPU and low power chipset if they can handly beat the 5700G in CPU and graphics performance.

~>Dg<~ · 5 Jan 2022 at 16:06

the problem is there isnt any budget boards for them. the prices are stupid. mortar for eg is 180 quid ! mortar boards normally 100 - 120 which is reasonable. 180 is taking the ****

Ross Thomson · 5 Jan 2022 at 16:07

Unless you see a comparison with a value budget GPU then you can't say its the value king. Comparing a 5600x with a MSI Radeon RX 6900XT Gaming X OC doesn't show value just the CPU bottle neck which isn't relevant for value systems.

humbug · 5 Jan 2022 at 16:08

Joxeon said:
He used a 12600k with Ecores disabled and clocks and power limits adjusted to 12400 levels so the cache difference is only 2mb.

So it is Apples for Oranges, "its only a bit different" is not a justification.