Core i7-12700F vs Core i5-6600K

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i5-6600K
2015
4 cores / 4 threads, 91 Watt
4.09
Core i7-12700F
2022
12 cores / 20 threads, 65 Watt
19.83
+385%

Core i7-12700F outperforms Core i5-6600K by a whopping 385% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i5-6600K and Core i7-12700F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking1335260
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.6361.50
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Core i5 (Desktop)no data
Architecture codenameSkylake (2015−2016)Alder Lake-S (2022)
Release date2 July 2015 (8 years ago)4 January 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$242$386
Current price$132 (0.5x MSRP)$280 (0.7x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

i7-12700F has 3673% better value for money than i5-6600K.

Detailed specifications

Core i5-6600K and Core i7-12700F basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores4 (Quad-Core)12 (Dodeca-Core)
Threads420
Base clock speed3.5 GHz2.1 GHz
Boost clock speed3.9 GHz4.9 GHz
L1 cache64K (per core)80K (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)1.25 MB (per core)
L3 cache6 MB (shared)25 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nmIntel 7 nm
Die size122 mm2215 mm2
Maximum core temperature64 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierYesNo

Compatibility

Information on Core i5-6600K and Core i7-12700F compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11
SocketFCLGA1151FCLGA1700
Power consumption (TDP)91 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i5-6600K and Core i7-12700F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technology2.02.0
Hyper-Threading Technology-+
TSX++
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
SIPP-no data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+
StatusDiscontinuedLaunched

Security technologies

Core i5-6600K and Core i7-12700F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-+
EDB++
Secure Key++
MPX+no data
Identity Protection+no data
SGXYes with Intel® MEno data
OS Guard++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i5-6600K and Core i7-12700F are enumerated here.

AMD-V+no data
VT-d++
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i5-6600K and Core i7-12700F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200
Maximum memory size64 GB128 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth34.1 GB/s76.8 GB/s
ECC memory support-no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics 530no data
Max video memory64 GBno data
Quick Sync Video+no data
Clear Video+no data
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency1.15 GHzno data
InTru 3D+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core i5-6600K and Core i7-12700F integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+no data
HDMI+no data
DVI+no data

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Core i5-6600K and Core i7-12700F integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution support+no data
Max resolution over HDMI 1.44096x2304@24Hzno data
Max resolution over eDP4096x2304@60Hzno data
Max resolution over DisplayPort4096x2304@60Hzno data
Max resolution over VGAN/Ano data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Core i5-6600K and Core i7-12700F integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX12no data
OpenGL4.5no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i5-6600K and Core i7-12700F.

PCIe version3.05.0 and 4.0
PCI Express lanes1620

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

i5-6600K 4.09
i7-12700F 19.83
+385%

Core i7-12700F outperforms Core i5-6600K by 385% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

i5-6600K 6319
i7-12700F 30667
+385%

Core i7-12700F outperforms Core i5-6600K by 385% in Passmark.

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

i5-6600K 1428
i7-12700F 2370
+66%

Core i7-12700F outperforms Core i5-6600K by 66% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

i5-6600K 4035
i7-12700F 11584
+187%

Core i7-12700F outperforms Core i5-6600K by 187% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

i5-6600K 6188
i7-12700F 9146
+47.8%

Core i7-12700F outperforms Core i5-6600K by 48% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

i5-6600K 21324
i7-12700F 56067
+163%

Core i7-12700F outperforms Core i5-6600K by 163% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

i5-6600K 7413
i7-12700F 15823
+113%

Core i7-12700F outperforms Core i5-6600K by 113% in 3DMark06 CPU.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

i5-6600K 7
i7-12700F 34
+383%

Core i7-12700F outperforms Core i5-6600K by 383% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

i5-6600K 602
i7-12700F 2610
+334%

Core i7-12700F outperforms Core i5-6600K by 334% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

i5-6600K 166
i7-12700F 271
+63.3%

Core i7-12700F outperforms Core i5-6600K by 63% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

i5-6600K 1.88
i7-12700F 3.28
+74.5%

Core i7-12700F outperforms Core i5-6600K by 74% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

i5-6600K 3.2
i7-12700F 3.3
+3.1%

Core i7-12700F outperforms Core i5-6600K by 3% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

i5-6600K 3643
i7-12700F 8695
+139%

Core i7-12700F outperforms Core i5-6600K by 139% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

i5-6600K 40
i7-12700F 119
+196%

Core i7-12700F outperforms Core i5-6600K by 196% in x264 encoding pass 2.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

i5-6600K 196
i7-12700F 297
+51%

Core i7-12700F outperforms Core i5-6600K by 51% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.09 19.83
Recency 2 July 2015 4 January 2022
Physical cores 4 12
Threads 4 20
Cost $242 $386
Power consumption (TDP) 91 Watt 65 Watt

The Core i7-12700F is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i5-6600K in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i5-6600K and Core i7-12700F, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Core i5-6600K
Core i5-6600K
Intel Core i7-12700F
Core i7-12700F

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.6 1051 vote

Rate Core i5-6600K on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 1268 votes

Rate Core i7-12700F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i5-6600K or Core i7-12700F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.