Core i5-12400F vs Ryzen 3 3300X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 3 3300X
2020
4 cores / 8 threads, 65 Watt
8.68
Core i5-12400F
2022
6 cores / 12 threads, 65 Watt
12.64
+45.6%

Core i5-12400F outperforms Ryzen 3 3300X by a considerable 46% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 3 3300X and Core i5-12400F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking826565
Place by popularitynot in top-1004
Cost-effectiveness evaluation33.9357.28
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Architecture codenameMatisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)Alder Lake-S (2022)
Release date24 April 2020 (4 years ago)4 January 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$120no data
Current price$145 (1.2x MSRP)$168

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

i5-12400F has 69% better value for money than Ryzen 3 3300X.

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 3 3300X and Core i5-12400F 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)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads812
Base clock speed3.8 GHz2.5 GHz
Boost clock speed4.3 GHz4.4 GHz
L1 cache96K (per core)80K (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)1.25 MB (per core)
L3 cache16 MB (shared)18 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nmIntel 7 nm
Die size74 mm2163 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)95 °Cno data
Number of transistors3,800 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierYesNo

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 3 3300X and Core i5-12400F 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
SocketAM4FCLGA1700
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 3 3300X and Core i5-12400F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions86x MMX(+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A,-64, AMD-V, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, SHA, Precision Boost 2Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
TSXno data+
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoringno data+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data-
Statusno dataLaunched

Security technologies

Ryzen 3 3300X and Core i5-12400F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 3 3300X and Core i5-12400F are enumerated here.

AMD-V+no data
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 3 3300X and Core i5-12400F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-3200DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200
Maximum memory sizeno data128 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data76.8 GB/s

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 3 3300X and Core i5-12400F.

PCIe version4.05.0 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.

Ryzen 3 3300X 8.68
i5-12400F 12.64
+45.6%

Core i5-12400F outperforms Ryzen 3 3300X by 46% 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%

Ryzen 3 3300X 13425
i5-12400F 19550
+45.6%

Core i5-12400F outperforms Ryzen 3 3300X by 46% 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%

Ryzen 3 3300X 1662
i5-12400F 2198
+32.3%

Core i5-12400F outperforms Ryzen 3 3300X by 32% 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%

Ryzen 3 3300X 5763
i5-12400F 8949
+55.3%

Core i5-12400F outperforms Ryzen 3 3300X by 55% 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%

Ryzen 3 3300X 5856
i5-12400F 8389
+43.3%

Core i5-12400F outperforms Ryzen 3 3300X by 43% 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%

Ryzen 3 3300X 25416
i5-12400F 40690
+60.1%

Core i5-12400F outperforms Ryzen 3 3300X by 60% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

Ryzen 3 3300X 6.04
i5-12400F 4.08
+48%

Ryzen 3 3300X outperforms Core i5-12400F by 48% in wPrime 32.

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%

Ryzen 3 3300X 12
i5-12400F 20
+72.5%

Core i5-12400F outperforms Ryzen 3 3300X by 73% 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%

Ryzen 3 3300X 1071
i5-12400F 1759
+64.2%

Core i5-12400F outperforms Ryzen 3 3300X by 64% 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%

Ryzen 3 3300X 195
i5-12400F 244
+25.1%

Core i5-12400F outperforms Ryzen 3 3300X by 25% 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%

Ryzen 3 3300X 2.28
i5-12400F 2.95
+29.4%

Core i5-12400F outperforms Ryzen 3 3300X by 29% 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%

Ryzen 3 3300X 5.9
i5-12400F 9.3
+57.6%

Core i5-12400F outperforms Ryzen 3 3300X by 58% 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%

Ryzen 3 3300X 7177
i5-12400F 7816
+8.9%

Core i5-12400F outperforms Ryzen 3 3300X by 9% 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%

Ryzen 3 3300X 62
i5-12400F 101
+64%

Core i5-12400F outperforms Ryzen 3 3300X by 64% 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%

Ryzen 3 3300X 234
i5-12400F 253
+8.1%

Core i5-12400F outperforms Ryzen 3 3300X by 8% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.68 12.64
Recency 24 April 2020 4 January 2022
Physical cores 4 6
Threads 8 12

The Core i5-12400F is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 3 3300X in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 3 3300X and Core i5-12400F, 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.


AMD Ryzen 3 3300X
Ryzen 3 3300X
Intel Core i5-12400F
Core i5-12400F

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.


4.4 1021 vote

Rate Ryzen 3 3300X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 11350 votes

Rate Core i5-12400F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 3 3300X or Core i5-12400F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.