We reviewed the i3-12100F here: ruclips.net/video/xBDFCoGhZ4g/видео.html We went through the specs of all of Intel’s lower-end Alder Lake CPUs & motherboards here: ruclips.net/video/_FJKCVFOa_c/видео.html TOOLKITS are IN STOCK & SHIPPING NOW: store.gamersnexus.net/products/gamersnexus-tear-down-toolkit Buy the Disappointment PC Shirt in cotton store.gamersnexus.net/products/disappointment-pc-t-shirt-2021-100-cotton-black or Tri-Blend store.gamersnexus.net/products/disappointment-pc-t-shirt-2021-triblend-black to support us, our special intros, even more in-depth testing as we continue to expand the lab in 2022, and to commemorate a year of disappointment! You can see our review of the i5-12600K here: ruclips.net/video/OkHMh8sUSuM/видео.html Our 12900K CPU review is here: ruclips.net/video/fhI9tLOg-6I/видео.html You can find our Z690 motherboard round-up here: ruclips.net/video/VEkDVlv1FFg/видео.html We also have a full playlist of CPU Cooler reviews here: ruclips.net/p/PLsuVSmND84QtyyYcalFch402w3ypcp1TQ
@Steve @GamersNexus, You need to dye your beautiful locks, NObody looks good with grey hair, especially if they are as young as you, just look at JZ2Cents for example, that dude is easily 55+...
"IF" all you were buying was the CPU, then that $100 difference would be massive.! But in the context of an core system vs the (headlined) 5600X competition, the motherboard takes a bite.! I have not looked at the prices, but I am surprised that GN "only" compared the CPU prices rather than the "whole" (the "platform price" of CPU + Mobo) which is unlike GN to do.! Although I was glad to see that they clearly compared DDR4 vs DDR4 systems (not all do, those are trash).
Really appreciate the amount of work you and your team has done in the last couple weeks covering CES product events/launches, intel non k CPU’s, and the H670, B660, and H610 roundup. I love the amount of videos we have been getting, but I assume it has to be exhausting. Anyway I just wanted to say thanks to everyone at GN who is bringing us the Grade A content
Thank you so much for the kind words! It was hard getting back up to this speed since we had slowed down for the move -- but that's all done now and everything is moving with awesome efficiency! I'll pass the comment on to the team!
I like the little zoom-in where you see the text "SR5LY" on the chip, that kind of cracked me up. No idea what it actually means/stands for, but I take this CPU seriously so it fits.
That's great value indeed. I've always liked the Intel xx400 series CPUs. They offer good and solid gaming performance for much less money, and good lite production value as well. I wouldn't get one for my main work and gaming PC, but it's easy to recommend to friends and family members who don't need enthusiast/professional level performance, or aren't willing to pay for it. Like the i5-10400f with an RTX 3060 Ti is among the best gaming value packages out there.
@@tempestsquall5882 And it would still be as expensive as a 6500XT(not that that’s much better). Laptops are the only way to get decently specced hardware for a decent price now.
@@santhoshsridhar5887 3060 Ti is much better than a 6500xt will be. 3060 Ti is very close to 3070 in game benchmarks, being most likely around 30-40% faster than 6500xt. I got one 3060 Ti via a prebuild pc for about 500€ last March (the entire pc cost 1000€). Nowadays even those prebuilds are 40-60% more expensive, making it equally expensive to get a 3060 Ti, no matter the source.
This and the 12100 are such good offerings. Happy with my recent 5600x, but I was already on AM4. This would be a no-brainer if I didnt already have a platform to upgrade.
@@prashanthb6521 In most games 10900 is ahead in both avg fps and the 1% lows. In the 1% lows it gives 15-25% more fps. In production jobs its like 2-3% slower than the R7 5800X. Pretty sure i made the right choice!
I have 5775c so similar performance ... When i look at benchmark 4 and 5 series are around 2/3 performance of 9 series in games and 1/2 in "production workloads" .... looking at where 9900k is on these charts the 12 series becomes VERY enticing for holdouts like us (or my friend still with 2700k hehe)
@@crazybeatrice4555 it is also much newer so I’m not surprised. It even gets pretty close to my 5600G in multi core loads. 9000 in cinebench vs 10400. Although both of these smash my laptop lol, I have an i5 5250U that gets 1600.
About ~2 to 10fps, depending on the game vs the 730. This difference is 24 (730) execution units vs 32 on the 770. If your only buying it for the GPU would look at an AMD g CPU as well. Unfortunately Intel didn't put "Iris Xe" graphics on any desktop chips, which are better then UHD graphics.
I bought a 12600 but still no motherboard (H670 itx pre ordered). I needed the IGPU as its a media PC build and wont use a graphics card, and will run games over a LAN connection from my main PC. Went with the 12600 because I wanted the strongest I5 non K and it didn't cost much more.
@@3polygons We can also thank Intel for incentivizing AMD to compete. They had to really innovate with Ryzen to make up for how hard their ass was kicked during the Bulldozer era.
@@raymonlandry228 Yep, but being both an AMD and Intel user, I remember too well the Intel milking time, and now Intel has to fight back to not keep losing market. I doubt they'd have gone this far without the competitor push. What I give Intel is mostly an efficiency and capability title: They would prefer the stagnation and comfy market dominance (less money spent in research, more benefits), but they have been able to bring technological advantage (it's rumored that partly thanks to putting more engineers among the decision makers), after several generations of just trying to keep up, until finally with Alder Lake. But both are companies, with investors to respond to. If there's competition, we win, one way or the other. Intel now is a very interesting option in the GPU market, too. That's really good. The 12400 is one the best deals of the latest years, including both AMD and intel (IMO yet are also a 5600X or a 5800X, for power consumption/performance, but not so great (not even close) in cost/performance as 12400 is). Typed this on m y 3900X main, having under the table the old backup intel machine ;) . That I can easily (just did) recommend a 12400 for a mid-end graphic artist/designer freelancer (which I am) for his/her work, while that's low rank in price, it's beyond amazing.
@@3polygons It goes both ways, intel would still be selling quad cores with 1% annual performance gains if it wasn't for ryzen. But AMD having been in such a good position for 4 years too now, they've creeping up their prices, now they'll have to lower them a bit because it appears intel 12th gen really is on par with ryzen 5th gen. This is good, you don't want intel becoming a joke the same way AMD was a joke for years. You don't want either company to become a joke, bad for pricing.
I mean, AMD boards with comparable specs are quite cheaper than the Intel boards still.. You can get $100 AMD boards with the same specs as some of the $150+ Intel boards You're not wrong though
@@Mr.Morden A base-level X570 + R5600 is still $20-45 (depending on deals) more expansive than a B660 (DDR4) + 12400f... Now look at the performance, and tell what's the better deal.
The 12400 is a nice cpu for a dual purpose pc on a budget, the 12100 is the gamin pc on a budget go to. In my use i would be hitting gpu limit before the cpu becomes the issue.
For anyone gaming at 1440p nd above, the CPU just becomes a moot point. As Gamers Nexus and many others by have stated many times before, unless you are specifically targeting very high frame rates at 1080p, spending lots of money on a high end CPU is a fools errand (from a gaming perspective) - Also even on 1080p the CPU differences are exaggerated when using the highest END GPUs Thus the difference on even 1080p gaming become hardly noticeable if comparing i3 12100 vs an i7 12700k using something like an RTX 3060 or 1080ti equivalent. As usual you are far better just upgrading your GPU. No need to upgrade CPUs everytime there is a new kid on the block.
@@scroopynooperz9051 Mostly. There are some exceptions dependent on game. My 6700k was still fine for many games, but it was starting to show it's age on some. X-planes 11 with mods was bringing it to it's knees in certain situations. Also I do a lot of sim racing, and anything that can bring up the 1% lows is very helpful for that.
@@sic22l there is a $100 +/- dollar gap between a 12400f and a 5600x that should more than make up for the difference. Add another 70 or so dollars to the gap if using a 12100f.
Don’t forget that the 12500 COmes with UHD 770, up from 12400’s 730. That’s a pretty big jump and could make a difference if someone doesn’t expect to be able to get a GPU for a while.
Integrated graphics is really bad for gaming. Especially on intel due to low[er] cache. Don't expect to be playing any modern 3d game decently on it. It will most likely let you watch 4k hdr content competently and play 2d games well. But don't rely on it. I personally wouldn't even consider it as a stopgap. Get the low end 12100F and spend the difference on a proper gpu.
Is UHD 770 enough for 4K HDR (60fps) playback for like netflix/Prime/RUclips etc. For HTPC? For some things you needed for example some specific codec stuff for netflix for example so you couldn't just get like a random Nvidea GPU or AMD APU that is otherwise powerfull enough.
That's like saying a 6600GT would be better than an FX 5200 to play cyberpunk. I don't get why people even suggest igpu for low end gaming. They are display outputs at best.
Finally, it took over a year but amd finally gets the kick in the balls they deserve for increasing their Ryzen 5 price from $200 to $300 with the 5600x!
@@nicekeyboardalan6972 I really don't like the 5700g, i thought it was cool after i saw it at first but I realized that AMD crippled it by eliminating pcie 4.0 on it because they were scared it would take away from x sku sales.
it nice that amd 3600 still on your list my one has had heavy use over the last 2+ year and still going stong 1000's of hours but yes in 2022 you can now get better CPU for cost so thank you for this I still GPU bound as still using RX580 and have no hope of not getting new GPU with out getting pocket pick to get new GPU so hold out to end on year finger cross
I appreciate that intel continues to offer the best $130 and $200 CPU. AMD has interesting APU in this category, but thier supply and price level is not consistent.
Future-proofing is worth it when it comes at relatively low incremental cost for something that has a very high likelihood of being useful. Games, software, background tasks and OSes in general growing beyond what 4C8T can comfortably accommodate within the next 5-7 years is practically certain, so getting 6C12T makes sense if you intend to use the system for longer than that. If I include the time my computers spend in the living room when I upgrade my main system and the time they spend serving as my offline backup server after that, I get about 15 years of useful life out of my PCs.
@@mahmoudelnashar9776 An upgrade is only worth it if you actually need it. If you were contemplating upgrading from a 9100F to a 12100F, that is $300-450 rebuild cost for ~60% more performance, not really worth it IMO. Personally, I'd rather spend the $50-70 extra for the 12400(F) and get ~2.5X as much performance on tap if you can spare the extra cash.
Agree. I'd argue even buying a 6c12t CPU in 2022 is stretching it in the long run. I get the impression that a lot of these DIY PC consumer channels have too narrow a perspective on what a normal, rational consumer realistically would want: longevity and as much usefulness as possible, which you can express in "dollars per month of effective ownership" for example. Instead the focus is on hyping up the latest and "greatest" budget and mid-range parts, which ultimately is geared more towards frequent and incremental upgrades basically to support the "consoom more" mentality (in contrast to what they profess about e-waste). I can't count all the times I've heard "anything more than a i5 600 class is overkill for gaming", overlooking that they're running on synthetically clean installs of Windows, disregard how many want to multitask while maintaining as much performance as possible (though understandably this is hard to test consistently), and not really asking themselves how the CPU will age in 3-5 years vs the more high end parts. Take note I'm not specifically taking a jab at GN here, but the DIY consumer PC-oriented techtubers in general. I do agree "future proofing" can be unpredictable, but you surely have a much higher chance of getting more actual use out of an i9 or i7 in 5 years than an i5, let alone a 4c4t i3. I obviously also understand people want to spend less money, but I don't understand how they could come to the conclusion that an i5 has more long-term value and is cheaper in terms of "dollars per month of ownership" than an i7 or i9. An i7 you keep for 6 years with the same motherboard is likely to be effectively cheaper than an i5 you upgrade with a new motherboard after 3-4 years. Heck, the i7 12700k is only around $100 more than the i5 12600k with two more P-cores and four more threads. Even if they're close in synthetic benchmarks right now I can't wrap my head around why someone would think that $100 saving in upfront cost would translate to better value in the long run, even for a strictly gaming-focused build. Finally I also understand there are some DIY enthusiasts who like to buy new parts and make new builds all the time just because, but those people are less likely to be long term value-oriented anyway.
@@teardowndan5364 Yes I totally agree that's why I was asking if it's worth it to go from 9100 go 12400, going from a 9th Gen I3 to a 12th Gen one is kinda waste of money lol.
Competition between AMD and Intel are good. I can't wait what AMD comes up next when it comes to budget value wise; it is definitely their turn to either price down their existing 5000 series or new ones.
I think I may have just found the CPU I'll be getting to upgrade from my i5-4460, I'll probably wait for AMD's new lineup and see if it's worth it still but it's looking like a worthy contender. Thanks for the video guys really loving the content lately.
Are u also multi-tasking? Using multiple tabs on chrome, having running 2 screens or even streaming? How are u experiencing that kind of things while gaming having
@@SpacingMonnik why would I be streaming? I have a real job. Multi-tasking is absolutely fine: I can play CSGO with a few hundred Chrome tabs open easy.
Intel really has come back strong with 12th gen, literally beating AMD in price in every CPU segment, and also in performance in most. $180 12400f matches $300 5600x. $260 12600kf beats $360 5800x. $314 12700f beats $540 5900x. AMD needs to stop being greedy and start lowering prices, because people have stopped recommending Zen 3 due to their horrible prices, and instead are recommending Intel again
It would be very good to have a retrospective or modern "security" section or discussion, including revisiting meltdown and spectre exploits and any others which may make the 12th gen better than X generations ago
I think the whole security thing has been so blown out of proportion that it simply isn't even worth talking about outside of those trying to come up with marketing material. Almost all of those "security flaws" required direct access to the hardware making it a non issue for so many people. Even the patches that fixed the issues were shown to have such a minimal impact on performance that it could almost be called margin of error (from the sources i've seen that actually tested it). So unless you are some secret agent carrying around missile launch keys in a briefcase laptop config, most users need not concern themselves with the buzzphrase "security flaw".
@@b-rant Actually some of the mitigates made a huge performance impact on the cost of syscalls. So network heavy applications (like servers) took some 10-12% hit, for gamers and Photoshop users the impact where perhaps not that big but for us server people it was huge, so huge in fact that we where I work have to run some of the servers with all mitigations removed.
@@Henrik_Holst 12% is likely noticeable without a doubt. Do you have to run the servers without the mitigations for performance reasons, or does something not work?
Thanks, Steve, for your words about future-proofing. I often get analysis paralysis when it comes to deciding whether to save money now or pay more for what amounts to little difference right now.
@@Electroshk Yeah running a 4670K for so long has given me some perspective in that regard. I think a lot of people, myself included, feel that need to upgrade far earlier than we might really need to. Of course, when it comes to production work, something that you make money off, performance = time = money. Otherwise, though, you can really hold onto stuff a lot longer than you might think (although in my case I may have held onto it for *too* long); certainly a lot longer than the industry and many "hypebeast" type techtubers might suggest.
I've been on the down side of future proofing. I ordered a gaming laptop with the best graphics card available at the time. (8800M GTX) The biggest part of that decision was that laptops generally don't have upgradable hardware, so I wanted performance that would last longer. It wasn't long after that, that the next version of DirectX came out, but that card wasn't compatible with it and I was unable to take advantage of the better visuals it offered. To add salt to the wound, that model came out when the soldering was changed (I think to reduce lead content), and the new formulation couldn't withstand the high heat of that card, causing problems. I never got mine replaced because others still had problems with it after warranty claims. So I just cut my losses and moved on. I would've been much better off with a lower end card to save money and get more use from it. Since then, I've stuck more to the middle of the road, or slightly better and been pretty happy. I'm currently playing MS Flight Sim 2020 with an i5-8400 and GTX 1060 3GB on a 4K monitor. Even with graphics dialed down low, it still looks great and holds around 45 fps. I don't need super high frame rates to casually enjoy a game.
Recently upgraded my failing PSU with a new one along with a case and this i5-12400F is looking really attractive right now. Still rocking an old i7-4790 with a 1070ti.
yea ive got a 4790k and an asrock z97 extreme4 motherboard and the 12400/b660 mobo combo is looking very attractive to me. curious if i would see significant improvements
I had a i7 4790 with MSI 1070 Gaming X, upgraded to i5 12400f (B660M-A board) and I can say it's a night and day difference, between desktop usage, gaming and CAD work. Very much worth it, even keeping the 'old' GPU. So I can recommend it
@@fakhrimub6760 They don't need to. 5600X to this day is the best-selling and most sought after mid-range CPU. All statistics and charts prove that. People are always quick to forget - CPU alone means nothing. As it is with Intel - new board is to be factored in the price which suddenly doesn't make the price as appealing. That's exactly where they get you. Wheres for AMD B450 for example supports ALL generations of zen, including the upcoming 3DVCache refresh. Where's the value again exactly? People can't be that dim.
It´s not really surprising, at my company we made a survey of the repaired and serviced home computers (not business), it turned out that 95% of laptops/desktops are used for light work, browsing, media consumption and gaming, it´s no real surprise that families overall use their PC´s with entertainment in mind. Very few home users actually use their PC for production purposes including yours truly, streaming is probably the only exception here, most modern CPUs can stream just fine with 1080p gaming. Intel just knows their segment well, fortunately AMD came along and pushed them out of the 4/8 cosiness while lowering prices somewhat.
@@AurioDK yeah, I said it is ironic bc amd always used to be the "poor man's choice", but now if u want low end dual core or heck even good enough 6 core perf, intel delivers, while there's literally nothing on AMD's side. How the turns have tabled.
@@dontmatter4423 problem with all these companies, they get complacent and they relax, AMD did it, the Intel did it. What I hate is the "thanks AMD for making Intel push" when it should be "bloody AMD were crap so Intel did crap"
@@xFODDERx Have you seen the marketshare and size of Intel vs AMD? Really expecting the much smaller dog to drive the market? AMD is _literally_ 10 times smaller than Intel, in terms of staff, labs and profits - and yet they manage to keep up to some degree and their marketshare is only 4 times smaller - if anything, they're doing incredibly well given the circumstances. They have never been dealt the same cards. The only thing AMD can do is crawl out of their 15-20% share to a measly 30% at best, for Intel to pull out a new card out of their sleeves (that has been brewing the whole time in their lab) to push AMD back to its underdog place. Intel calls all the shots here. What pisses people off is that Intel has been consciously organizing their quasi-monopoly so precisely that they've been untouchable by the regulatory authorities for decades, allowing them to exploit it shamelessly to delay technological advances and fix up the prices, to maximize their margins for the shareholders bonuses and prevent any actual competition. Just like nVidia has been doing with ATI-now-AMD: organized quasi-monopoly, to hold back new tech and fix up prices, until the domesticated smaller competition catches up, to simply briefly adjust prices down and let a new gen out in the next 6 months, then going back to milking the controlled market, once the smaller dog is beaten back to its corner. People don't like being milked by monopolies, that's why they rejoice when AMD get a good gen out: finally they can give their money to a company that is more focused on survival than abusing their power like Intel. Even if it's playing right into Intel's plan, for a brief moment it's giving a false hope of having a competitive market.
@@TubeofDestiny wow, hit a nerve. 1) AMD didn't used to have a massively smaller market share, this only happened because with FX they got complacent. 2) AMD used to have many fabs, they segregated GF and subsequently sold off. 3) you need some anti-shill deodorant, you need to learn to look at all the facts and be more objective. 4) some people like myself build with both brands depending on the job spec, so stop seeing hate. 5) Intel are bigger, sure, is that a bad thing? If AMD had great kernel integration than maybe all those company supplied work from home laptops would have an AMD chip. 6) if AMD wanted then they could be bigger than Intel, but like seen here they choose to go balls to the wall rather than supporting the low end user, now as a monopoly expert can you tell me who benefits from not supplying to the poorer clients? Especially when 80% all users are in 2nd world countries...... Face it, all AMD give a crap about is AMD and INTEL will do the same, they don't love you, and they WILL lie to you, 5 year motherboard compatibility??? Sure you try getting a 6800xt, an old board, putting a 5950x and getting SAM etc. Thing is EVERY new chip has technology that has to be shared with it's current chipset, if you can't see that then you are nothing more than a 14 year old trying to justify his second hand 1600 purchase. Edit* market share is only in Steam, which doesn't cover commercial and none gaming usage, you are so shill you mix 2 separate facts 🤣 Edit** if you think AMD won't milk you, you are obviously to young to remember Bulldozer.
Something left out from the price points: - mobos prices: amd B550 based mb is ~55$ cheaper than intel b660 based mb (or in other words - you can take amd z570 for price of intel b660) (considering both are ddr4) - 5600x has unlocked multiplier, while lowest unlocked intel is 12600k. While 12400f is generally cheaper, you pay more for 5600x, the amount is almost the same as intel asks to pay for unlocked 12600k compared to basic 12600 (this is taking into account mb price difference).
unlock or not doesnt fkin matter when the performance is almost equal in fact overclock is a thing of the past, nobody do that shit anymore with PBO and good turbo
Blender 3.0 is released now and it includes a significantly updated Cycles render engine. I'd be interested to see how the new render engine scales with current CPUs.
2:30 The 12400 has the 730 graphics while the 12500 has the 770. Pretty big difference if you don't have a standalone GPU. ruclips.net/video/w58f0GE1J0E/видео.html The test I linked shows the 11400 vs the 12600k, so not apples to apples in terms of CPU.
I considered this, but then realized that for the same money of a new MB and this CPU I could drop at least a Ryzen 5800 in my current PC and get more. AMD really did well with AM4 longevity. For complete from scratch builds however this CPU is sufficient for all the people I usually build and maintain systems. I expect to build at least two new systems on a budget to replace a 6 and 7 year old PC in 2022 and intel is looking good.
Except that a good B660 board + this Intel CPU cost the exact same as a B550 board + 5600x. You have to look at more than a single component price and look at the platform as a whole. And you're right, it makes even less sense to jump platforms when you probably already have a good mobo. Bios update, sell old CPU, buy 5600x or whatever and it's very cheap to upgrade.
@@thatguythatdoesstuff7448 Yeah, 5000 series works fine in a B450 board. So I literally only have to buy a CPU vs MB + CPU. Considering the cheapest S1700 board I can buy right now on pre-order is 105 euro and the cheapest 12400 is 200 euro. For that I can also buy a 5600X (boxed) or a 5700G (tray). My current CPU (3600) in that machine goes secondhand for 130 - 140 euro (the ones that sell, people try getting 180 for it but those don't sell) If I sell that first my budget is about 435 euros, for which I would be able to buy a new 5800X. Of course then I could also sell both my current MB and CPU That would get me maybe an extra 50 euro. I would then have enough for a 105 Euro S1700 plus 285 euro for a S1700 CPU. That would get me an Intel Core i5-12600KF. Not quite sure what to get between a 5800X and that? Anyway upgrading that last PC will be interesting, the main two machines were upgraded last year in both X470 meant it was a no brainer. My 3700X went from the game PC to the work PC (had the 3600) and the Game PC got a 5800X. That third PC has a 1080 in it and serves as a remote compute server. I need a cheaper hobby!
@@aureliusindomitus9235 I hope that because of faster progress in CPUs, CPUs won't last as long. It's really not fun to use one CPU for whole 8 years. Games for 9th console generation will start demanding more from CPUs. PS5's CPU is 6.4x faster than PS4's CPU.
As a fellow well overclocked 4790k owner I have finally decided he will be retired as I have just bought the 12400f. Found a crazy good value for money bundle. I don't expect to get the same longevity out of this chip - but I am ok with that, in 3/4 years time DDR5 will be performing well and a lot cheaper, there is no reason to buy a more expensive 12th series chip if you are not planning on going full DDR5, at that point it becomes double the price or more.
The thing with CPUs is that futureproofing makes most sense for them since 4 years down the line you can buy a good value GPU and dramatically increase the life of the system, while you need to change the whole system if the CPU can’t handle it anymore. I just went from a i5 6500 to 5600x and 6500 was bottlenecking even a 1660s even though it was good back in 2016. 4 cores definitely won’t be enough for games starting anytime now.
@@klyplays If you trust the seller. I have a hard time with expensive components like that that I do not want to have to replace often. If they ran a CPU at ridiculous thermals, while it may still work when you buy it, the lifespan may be drastically reduced. Maybe you luck out and save the CPU and give it proper cooling and it rewards you with long-term use or maybe it gives up on you and not the person that caused it, and now you're out of money and cpu.
@@klyplays That will hardly be an upgrade due to socket limitation yet still cost a lot? Sure, I could upgrade to 7xxx for little gain and a lot of money.
I have to admit I was on the brink of an AMD 5900x upgrade to my old 7700k pc , but the new 12000 series has me impressed... I now am looking at a 12700K build ..what I'd like to know is what air coolers work well with the Alderlake heat spreader... between GN and hardware unboxed I've gotten most info I need except the cooler.
Hey Steve could you make a comparison between the 12400 and the 5600G. Graphics cards are impossible to get now so it would be nice to know how these two compare with eathother.
The graphics are way better on 5600g but intel cpu cores are a few percent better...probably still better to go with 5600g if your not gonna get a discrete gpu
5600G runs circles even around the very best Intel iGPU. Now, if you have any kind of dedicated GPU at all that's better than a GTX 960/1050 Ti or a RX 560? Get the Intel CPU and get a GPU later on when you can. But if the iGPU is going to be your primary method of gaming as well, stick with the 5600/5700G for now or maybe even wait and see when the RDNA2 APUs from AMD come out-the 6700G-equivalent is supposedly going to have what equates to a GTX-1650 level of performance built into it.
Good review, although I would've liked to hear more about the practical advantages of having +2 cores over the i3. For example, does the i3 start to struggle while gaming if - heaven forbid - you also run a couple of chrome tabs and spotify and discord and maybe a couple more programs in the background/second monitor? What if you'd like to stream once every blue moon? I get that for gaming they're very close, but since PCs aren't consoles, PC gamers don't game the same way consoles do (eg: launching a game and only running the game and nothing else running in the background)
For CPU-demanding rendering, compiling, compression, video editing or streaming I'd always try to reach for 6C/12T i5, instead of 4C/8T i3. When talking about similar cores. Your SW might require specific minimum amount RAM and/or VRAM (GPU) to work smoothly. Or at all. Using HDD instead of SSD is can form a bottleneck. If your SW can utilize QSV (Intel Quick Sync Video), then regular i.e. "non-F-version" of the CPU might be worth few extra bucks. I'm not sure, how relevant this feature is today. All Intel ****F's lack the iGPU and thus also QSV. Another advantage of iGPU is to be able to ensure whether or not your external GPU is broken. For regular office tasks, net surfing, paying bills and perhaps even (low-res) gaming (of older games) an iGPU can be powerful enough. You can always buy external GPU later. Modern (Nvidia RTX) GPUs can be a great help for rendering (OptiX with Blender) and game streaming (NVENC). Being much more powerful than using your CPU alone. Chrome tabs, Widgets etc. _shouldn't_ have any practical effect when gaming. Well, on full screen gaming anyways. In that kind of scenarios OS _shouldn't_ have any reason to constantly update those tabs, widgets etc. In general, when gaming with middle-class GPU @1440p, your GPU is the most likely bottle-neck. Perhaps @1080p, too.
@@eukariootti1 In general, gaming at 1440p, even with a 3080, the GPU is the bottleneck. Any comparison I've seen has extremely similar results from lower end CPUs to high end CPUs. You need enough GPU overhead to see a difference in CPU comparisons at 1440p. I think the only CPU comparison I've seen on 1440p res where there were significant differences was using a 3090.
So happy competition is back in the cpu market. I was completely let down by AMD's 5000 series prices and now that intel is back amd will have to respond with a price cut or get smeared in sales. Yes. Before you say it, I'm aware there is a chip shortage but if INTEL of all companies can (and I can't believe I'm about to say this) charge LESS during said shortage, AMD has no excuses.
Actually, because Intel have it's own factories, they can provide more chips than AMD, who needs share the TSMC factory with the entire industry. Makes complete sense to Intel charge less than AMD right now, who was behind needs to charge less to regain market share, and a least until ZEN 4 comes out, is working.
You do realize Intel is one of the reasons there is a chip shortage. Not the only reason of course, but they did play a part. Regardless AMD doesn't have to change anything. Reminder 5000 series came out in November 2020. Yes. 2020 over a year ago. AMD answer will be the Zen 4. We will see if it can live up to par.
Not really. B660 prices are ridiculous, 12400 with the crappiest B660 DS3H costs as much as 5600X with MSI B450 APro/Mortar/Gaming Plus or B550 Pro-VDH. AMD doesn't have to drop prices, they're even.
In short, if you use the CPU for gaming and common uses, not for making money, i3 12100f will be the right choice. That is the answer I need. Thank you for the review! Help me a lot.
Thank you, these benchmarks and thoughts are incredibly helpful. As somebody on a budget who does a mix of gaming and rendering/compiling/etc I couldn't make up my mind, but this has helped me see that the extra bit of cost will probably be worth it as a timesaver in the long run.
AMD won't lower prices too much right now. They can't compete against Alder Lake if people are buying a new system but if you are already in the AM4 socket it's easier and probably cheaper to upgrade in-house. They'll just roll with the punches until AM5 and Zen 4, then I'm sure they'll have some budget options to fight Intel for the lower end.
Nah, probably hold onto it. When I was on my 4670K I was really tempted to upgrade to the 3600, but then the 5600X came along and made it a no-brainer. There's always plenty of nice-to-have computer upgrades available, but it's always best to stretch for the real-deal upgrades.
Hey Steve ! Is it true that streaming requires an extra 2 cores and thus if one was to build a new system for gaming + streaming, would a 4 core be below requirements ? Would that make the 12400(f) the go-to budget build ?
What GPU do you have? If you use GPU hardware encoding (Nvidia NVENC for example) the CPU impact is minimal so a 12100F would definitely be sufficient. Although Intel iGPUs should have quicksync for encoding which does the same, could be a reason to get one with iGPU (so not the F version). Not sure if Radeon GPUs have hardware encoders (maybe AV1?), have no experience with those If you have none of this and let the CPU brute force the video stream (software encoding) then you would need more cpu grunt to avoid sacrificing fps. It's not about the amount of cores but about total CPU power (an 8C/16T Ryzen 7 1700 is not as fast as the i3-12100 even in multithreaded...)
Love the 4670/4790 comparison at the end. I just "upgraded" to the 4790 in my old-ass PC to make sure it wouldn't die playing Elden Ring. I figure this gets me another year before I build a new one.
Would love to see a comparison between the i5-12500 that has an 770 integrated graphics against a Ryzen 5600g. Nowadays the integrated graphics are pretty solid and more so with the prices of graphics card. Good content as always.
@Gamers Nexus Quick Query at 2:28 you showed the Specs chart and commented about the 12500 just having higher boost clocks, 2.5 however I also noticed that base clock is 3.0 against 2.5, also it had a different UHD GPU 770 rather than 730. Whilst I wouldn't be buying any AlderLake CPU's (10850K is plenty for me atm) I do wonder if there is any difference. I realise that none of these onboard graphics do gaming is there any/much improvement claimed ?
Intel is fighting back aggressively. Good to see. AMD badly need to lower their prices at this point. They're now out of the running for a lot of people's builds.
They are akready for me. I got a 12400F and im putting it into an H670. My next upgrade will just be a 12700. Im buying a PC now and this "low end" CPU pairs so well with my 3060ti that ive made sure my next upgrade can use the same socket.
In my country of New Zealand our computer store calls intels parts "great value for the money". That's what they used to say about AMD before Zen 3 came out and it's easy to see why things have changed now.
But it's NOT good value because you need to buy a new board too. Any value you save on the CPU you fork out for the motherboard. And if you want to Overclock - bye bye wallet.
@@egonieser "you need to buy a new board too". This comment is coming from the assumption the person is already on Zen. What about new builders or someone on something older? Yeah, if you wanna upgrade your 2700X, obviously you'd go Zen 3, but you can't just make the assumption that that's the case.
Der8aur has discovered overclocking abilities with the 12400 on some boards. Basically turned it into a 12700k/12900k going to almost 5.3 ghz. Should check out the video.
12700 next? That thing's benches are pretty nuts. You basically are just paying for the oc ability with the 12700k by comparison. Stg if Microcenter marks it down to 300 I'm activating my protection plan on my 12600k.
A suggestion for future proofing testing could be running the new unreal engine 5 demos like the city demos. I know a vast majority of games will be using ue5 and it would be a good indication of that perhaps? I know that the ue5 demo I'm talking about was not available at that time but still worth considering.
Really looking forward to upgrading to Alderlake this month. This settles it right here. If my gaming performance will trade blows CPU wise with a 9900k then count me in for a CPU that costs 200.
COme on man. the 9900K is 8 core 16 thread. The i5 is non overclockable and is 6 core 12 thread. You will be getting a downgrade and stutters when all the cores get used up compared to the 9900K
The CPU itself is good value overall however when you consider the price of the motherboard. Currently the cheapest decent motherboard is an H670 priced at 160$ + the 12400 gets you to 360$ which is pretty close to a decent B550 motherboard with a similar feature set and the 5600X which costs about 400$. Mind you with the 5600X and B550 you can also overclock. While the H670 only allows for memory overclocking and the 12400 is of course locked as well.
Intel fanboys are always blind to the fact what they think they save for a cheaper CPU they fork out in another mobo. B450/X470 is going to continue supporting even the upcoming Zen3 refresh. Now that is real value.
@@Wylie288 that's the second cheapest motherboard available that half decent. The cheapest one only has 2 memory slots shitty vrms and little in the matters of headers and expansion.
You do realize we have a GLOBAL sillicon shortage right? RN price to performance ratio determines price and nothing else. Supply can't meet demand for MSRP to matter.
It would be really interesting to see a K sku in the 12100 and 12400. Pushing those cores up would probably really put it at parity with more expensive cpus for gaming workloads.
I had a 4790 from 2014 to 2021 for that exact reason mentioned. Everyone told me go i5 and save $100. My 4790k is still in use in my living room / backup gaming pc. Paired with 32gb of cl10 ddr3 2400mhz and at 4.6ghz it's not exactly slow for it's age. Actually want to replace it with a 12100F just to dabble with the new cpu. My main rig is on a 10900 and hopefully that get's me similar life to my prior 4790k.
Is there a reason you didn't include more 9th/10th gen benchmarks? It's hard to gauge the 12th gen against anything that actually matters performance wise without it, given how much of an abomination most of the CPUs that gen were. Performance/$ the lower end chips were better, but if you're a skylake++++++++ owner (which is most people using intel rn) it makes it hard to judge the value of an upgrade. Including the 10900k and 9900k was nice, but those aren't particularly direct comparison points with the CPU being reviewed today, relative to what people who buy this kind of CPU prince point would realistically have.
They didn't include it because they need to run them again. Every time a new platform comes out they need to re-run everything and recalibrate all the data. They only have so much time to do that before the review becomes irrelavent.
@@XDSDDLord I get that, my point is that people who have the platforms they did test, probably aren't interested in upgrading to a mid/low end CPU. Had intel actually gotten faster with the 11 series it might have been useful, but they honestly didn't. Just makes it hard to gauge for the vast majority of people who'd be looking at a piece like this. Usually GN is good about this, but they only included it in a few spots. IDK maybe i'm just forgetting, seems like they usually cover their bases on that stuff
Very promising CPU. Sadly availability and prices of B660/H670 boards is still bad, making 12400+(cheapest)B660 370€, while 5600X+B550 at 380€ still is faster and even offers better value. I hope B660/H670 boards and Zen 3 CPUs will come down in price soon.
In your dreams. If 5800X3D is any indication, 3D cache alone will add $100 to every CPU, and without it, AMD will not be able to bead Intel at performance by the time both Zen4 and Raptor Lake are out.
With Nvidia 4000 series, Radeon 7000 series, AND Zen 4 all competing for TSMC 5nm capacity, I'd be surprised if AMD can even have the same availability they currently have. I seriously doubt AMD releases a sub $300 chip next gen given their resource constraints. If anything, maybe they repackage some Zen 3 or use some TSMC n7 capacity
The differnce between i5-12400 and i5-12500 is not only core clock boost, but vPro support. The i5-XX500 in any generation is an SKU for the business desktops.
I mean, they never lose the top in servers, just the consumer gaming market, and they still keep the laptops sales (thanks to amd prioritizing the consoles APU productions), in the beginning of the pandemic the most sold in the gaming market was weirdly the laptops. Hence Intel never really lose the top completely, but people act like it :/, honestly I was expecting the Rembrandt APU last year, zen3+ I still taking it's time and Intel is going full on with the 12 gen in both desktop and laptops markets. I'm saying all this but still wanting my next CPU to be from AMD.
For now, AMD needs to lower their prices and the Ryzen 7000 series is on the horizon. I hope there will be more serious competition from both, prices need to drop, hard.
I would hope a CPU released more than a year later has a non-negligible improvement in price to performance. A shame intel's reign led to this sort of improvement to be anything but the norm.
The 10900k is actually impressively good. ive been rocking mine since release day and it still is as fast as day 1. Will definitely not need a change until atleast 14900k-15900k comes...
Shows how far AMD has come that this is what Intel has to resort to to even come close. Excited for Ryzen 7000. The 12400 is a great chip, but man that 12100 is amazing value.
just sold my gaming PC which had a 2600x with a 1660. After watching this video, I will be going for the 12400. going to pair it with a 3060 for 1080p gaming. I love AMD and I know they live up to the hype. But at this time, the 12400 seems to be the winner over the 5600x my opinion. Thanks for sharing.
Not really. B660 prices are ridiculous, 12400 with the crappiest B660 DS3H costs as much as 5600X with MSI B450 APro/Mortar/Gaming Plus or B550 Pro-VDH. As a platform Intel is not cheaper. It's not faster either.
We reviewed the i3-12100F here: ruclips.net/video/xBDFCoGhZ4g/видео.html
We went through the specs of all of Intel’s lower-end Alder Lake CPUs & motherboards here: ruclips.net/video/_FJKCVFOa_c/видео.html
TOOLKITS are IN STOCK & SHIPPING NOW: store.gamersnexus.net/products/gamersnexus-tear-down-toolkit
Buy the Disappointment PC Shirt in cotton store.gamersnexus.net/products/disappointment-pc-t-shirt-2021-100-cotton-black or Tri-Blend store.gamersnexus.net/products/disappointment-pc-t-shirt-2021-triblend-black to support us, our special intros, even more in-depth testing as we continue to expand the lab in 2022, and to commemorate a year of disappointment!
You can see our review of the i5-12600K here: ruclips.net/video/OkHMh8sUSuM/видео.html
Our 12900K CPU review is here: ruclips.net/video/fhI9tLOg-6I/видео.html
You can find our Z690 motherboard round-up here: ruclips.net/video/VEkDVlv1FFg/видео.html
We also have a full playlist of CPU Cooler reviews here: ruclips.net/p/PLsuVSmND84QtyyYcalFch402w3ypcp1TQ
@Gamers Nexus I also noticed that the iGPU in the 12500 is UHD 770 vs UHD 730 in the 12400
Don't disrespect your hair like that...
@Steve @GamersNexus, You need to dye your beautiful locks, NObody looks good with grey hair, especially if they are as young as you, just look at JZ2Cents for example, that dude is easily 55+...
"IF" all you were buying was the CPU, then that $100 difference would be massive.! But in the context of an core system vs the (headlined) 5600X competition, the motherboard takes a bite.! I have not looked at the prices, but I am surprised that GN "only" compared the CPU prices rather than the "whole" (the "platform price" of CPU + Mobo) which is unlike GN to do.! Although I was glad to see that they clearly compared DDR4 vs DDR4 systems (not all do, those are trash).
@@slartibartfast2649 correct
I love that Steve’s hate for the 11900k is still going strong. he brings it up every chance he gets.
Well.... It being called a 'waste of sand' is being generous, honestly.
To be fair, the 11900k really deserves it.
Id still take it
As everybody should, that chip was the stupidest chip in. A long time
Yeah, he's like a wife whose husband forgot their anniversary... it's now a life-long subject.
Really appreciate the amount of work you and your team has done in the last couple weeks covering CES product events/launches, intel non k CPU’s, and the H670, B660, and H610 roundup. I love the amount of videos we have been getting, but I assume it has to be exhausting. Anyway I just wanted to say thanks to everyone at GN who is bringing us the Grade A content
Thank you so much for the kind words! It was hard getting back up to this speed since we had slowed down for the move -- but that's all done now and everything is moving with awesome efficiency! I'll pass the comment on to the team!
The people need to know about how great a deal the 12th i5 and i3 gen is!
@@GamersNexus Do you guys know if they'll release DDR4 12th Gen Boards for the low to mid range boards?
@@V_0717 Yeah they already exist.
@@Worthless. Oh? Steve already telling you in a direct reply that they GOT IT AT NEWEGG FOR $200 wasn't enough? Watch the f'n video ffs
I like the little zoom-in where you see the text "SR5LY" on the chip, that kind of cracked me up. No idea what it actually means/stands for, but I take this CPU seriously so it fits.
it says SRL5Y
That's the Intel "s-spec". I think it helps identify cpu model, revision, and stepping. Like a lot or batch number I guess
i think it means 'seriously'
That's great value indeed.
I've always liked the Intel xx400 series CPUs. They offer good and solid gaming performance for much less money, and good lite production value as well. I wouldn't get one for my main work and gaming PC, but it's easy to recommend to friends and family members who don't need enthusiast/professional level performance, or aren't willing to pay for it. Like the i5-10400f with an RTX 3060 Ti is among the best gaming value packages out there.
3069 ti was good value, would’ve been good value. Now 1050 ti is best bang for your buck.
@@tempestsquall5882 And it would still be as expensive as a 6500XT(not that that’s much better). Laptops are the only way to get decently specced hardware for a decent price now.
@@santhoshsridhar5887 I've noticed lots of the new second-hand desktops are being sold without the GPU. Hmm I wonder why...
@@santhoshsridhar5887 3060 Ti is much better than a 6500xt will be. 3060 Ti is very close to 3070 in game benchmarks, being most likely around 30-40% faster than 6500xt. I got one 3060 Ti via a prebuild pc for about 500€ last March (the entire pc cost 1000€). Nowadays even those prebuilds are 40-60% more expensive, making it equally expensive to get a 3060 Ti, no matter the source.
@Saurabh what?
You need a chart that shows overall relative performance per dollar. How much value are you actually getting with each cpu model at current prices.
FPS / $
the i3 would take that win. 144fps gaming for 100 bucks is a killer value for anyone that just games/mods/light work.
that'd be very hard for them to quantify impartially, I imagine they just don't want to touch that sort of thing.
@@RonnyJakobsson How would that matter if they used 3080? If you use different gpu, fps would change.
Price including mothboard. Be it b450 or h660 as this cost is equally important.
This and the 12100 are such good offerings. Happy with my recent 5600x, but I was already on AM4. This would be a no-brainer if I didnt already have a platform to upgrade.
What?
@@Hk7762Tube ?
Thing is - the cheapest B660 motherboard costs as much as B550 Tomahawk. 12400 platform costs basically as much as 5600X.
@@Hk7762Tube he already had AM4, so bios update and cpu update to any 5000 was available.
@@lonniebeal6032 thank you, I derpped a little, my bad.
I hope these cpus will help (force) AMD to reduce the prices.
5600x at 300€ doesn't make any sense anymore.
It almost never did in my opinion, i bought a 10900 for 60 euros extra
@@John__K Bad choice Johnny, Should have got the R7 !
@@prashanthb6521 In most games 10900 is ahead in both avg fps and the 1% lows. In the 1% lows it gives 15-25% more fps. In production jobs its like 2-3% slower than the R7 5800X. Pretty sure i made the right choice!
@@prashanthb6521 the 5800x is slightly slower than the 10900 in workloads... especially with power limits off
I don't get how it ever made sense, when the 3600 went for $160 (or, at least, that's what I paid.)
The main difference between the 12400 and the 12500 is the integrated graphics, the latter has a more powerful version of the UHD intel graphics
5900x still crushing it.
@@timothyandrewnielsen Damn a Ryzen 9 is crushing a i5, it better does at the price lmao
@@timothyandrewnielsen oh really? a CPU with twice as many cores and threads destroying the i5. Imagine that
@@timothyandrewnielsen Think a better comparison for that would be the 12900K.
@@timothyandrewnielsen 🤡🤡🤡🤡
It's fantastic seeing an i3 budget CPU performing so well again, it has been a long time! Now, Intel, do it to the GPU market.
welp that didnt really work
i'd wait
Thanks for clarifying DPC this time!
Surprised how well the i3 held up. Looks like it's high time I upgrade my 4690k after damn near 7 years lol
I have 5775c so similar performance ... When i look at benchmark 4 and 5 series are around 2/3 performance of 9 series in games and 1/2 in "production workloads" .... looking at where 9900k is on these charts the 12 series becomes VERY enticing for holdouts like us (or my friend still with 2700k hehe)
@@floodo1 I misread 2700k as 2700x lmao
probably wishes the 2700k was a 2700x tbh, seems like a large performance difference.
12400 would be a great step up.
@@crazybeatrice4555 it is also much newer so I’m not surprised. It even gets pretty close to my 5600G in multi core loads. 9000 in cinebench vs 10400. Although both of these smash my laptop lol, I have an i5 5250U that gets 1600.
2:30 I bought the 12500 this week, because it comes with UHD770 Graphics. Seemed worth the extra 20 bucks over the 12400 :)
What's the performance difference between the 770 and what 12400 has?
About ~2 to 10fps, depending on the game vs the 730. This difference is 24 (730) execution units vs 32 on the 770. If your only buying it for the GPU would look at an AMD g CPU as well.
Unfortunately Intel didn't put "Iris Xe" graphics on any desktop chips, which are better then UHD graphics.
I bought a 12600 but still no motherboard (H670 itx pre ordered).
I needed the IGPU as its a media PC build and wont use a graphics card, and will run games over a LAN connection from my main PC. Went with the 12600 because I wanted the strongest I5 non K and it didn't cost much more.
@@PorterB what itx board did you pre order. In the same position as you right now
Asrock H670M-ITX/ax, £180 preorder from Scan.
Thank you for the content. Looks like I’ll be making a much needed upgrade from the 9400f to the 12400f
thank you for the video
12400 is almost on par with previous core i9's (in gaming)
awesome and kinda hilarious at the same time
Competition at best
We have to thank AMD for that... while buying finally the best bang for the buck, whichever it is.
@@3polygons We can also thank Intel for incentivizing AMD to compete. They had to really innovate with Ryzen to make up for how hard their ass was kicked during the Bulldozer era.
@@raymonlandry228 Yep, but being both an AMD and Intel user, I remember too well the Intel milking time, and now Intel has to fight back to not keep losing market. I doubt they'd have gone this far without the competitor push. What I give Intel is mostly an efficiency and capability title: They would prefer the stagnation and comfy market dominance (less money spent in research, more benefits), but they have been able to bring technological advantage (it's rumored that partly thanks to putting more engineers among the decision makers), after several generations of just trying to keep up, until finally with Alder Lake. But both are companies, with investors to respond to. If there's competition, we win, one way or the other. Intel now is a very interesting option in the GPU market, too. That's really good.
The 12400 is one the best deals of the latest years, including both AMD and intel (IMO yet are also a 5600X or a 5800X, for power consumption/performance, but not so great (not even close) in cost/performance as 12400 is). Typed this on m y 3900X main, having under the table the old backup intel machine ;) . That I can easily (just did) recommend a 12400 for a mid-end graphic artist/designer freelancer (which I am) for his/her work, while that's low rank in price, it's beyond amazing.
@@3polygons It goes both ways, intel would still be selling quad cores with 1% annual performance gains if it wasn't for ryzen. But AMD having been in such a good position for 4 years too now, they've creeping up their prices, now they'll have to lower them a bit because it appears intel 12th gen really is on par with ryzen 5th gen. This is good, you don't want intel becoming a joke the same way AMD was a joke for years. You don't want either company to become a joke, bad for pricing.
12400 + B660 is going to be a very formidable combo. Thank goodness Intel unlocked memory overclocking last gen.
I mean, AMD boards with comparable specs are quite cheaper than the Intel boards still.. You can get $100 AMD boards with the same specs as some of the $150+ Intel boards
You're not wrong though
@@canaconn2388
Yeah but the AMD CPU would be $120 more lol
I dunno, B660 motherboards cost so much more that any savings made on the CPU are lost paying for the board.
@@Mr.Morden A base-level X570 + R5600 is still $20-45 (depending on deals) more expansive than a B660 (DDR4) + 12400f... Now look at the performance, and tell what's the better deal.
waste of money to buy anything less than Z boards.locked overclocking so bad
The 12400 is a nice cpu for a dual purpose pc on a budget, the 12100 is the gamin pc on a budget go to. In my use i would be hitting gpu limit before the cpu becomes the issue.
Yeah at this point there's no way in hell I can afford a GPU that would be bottlenecked by the 12100f
For anyone gaming at 1440p nd above, the CPU just becomes a moot point.
As Gamers Nexus and many others by have stated many times before, unless you are specifically targeting very high frame rates at 1080p, spending lots of money on a high end CPU is a fools errand (from a gaming perspective) - Also even on 1080p the CPU differences are exaggerated when using the highest END GPUs
Thus the difference on even 1080p gaming become hardly noticeable if comparing i3 12100 vs an i7 12700k using something like an RTX 3060 or 1080ti equivalent.
As usual you are far better just upgrading your GPU. No need to upgrade CPUs everytime there is a new kid on the block.
@@scroopynooperz9051 Mostly. There are some exceptions dependent on game. My 6700k was still fine for many games, but it was starting to show it's age on some. X-planes 11 with mods was bringing it to it's knees in certain situations. Also I do a lot of sim racing, and anything that can bring up the 1% lows is very helpful for that.
Budget part is questionable due to ridiculous motherboard pricing, B660 included.
@@sic22l there is a $100 +/- dollar gap between a 12400f and a 5600x that should more than make up for the difference. Add another 70 or so dollars to the gap if using a 12100f.
Don’t forget that the 12500 COmes with UHD 770, up from 12400’s 730. That’s a pretty big jump and could make a difference if someone doesn’t expect to be able to get a GPU for a while.
Integrated graphics is really bad for gaming. Especially on intel due to low[er] cache. Don't expect to be playing any modern 3d game decently on it. It will most likely let you watch 4k hdr content competently and play 2d games well. But don't rely on it. I personally wouldn't even consider it as a stopgap. Get the low end 12100F and spend the difference on a proper gpu.
@@tfwmemedumpster On desktop intel CPU's yes. But on laptop Intel iris graphics is pretty good.
came here to say this.
Is UHD 770 enough for 4K HDR (60fps) playback for like netflix/Prime/RUclips etc.
For HTPC?
For some things you needed for example some specific codec stuff for netflix for example so you couldn't just get like a random Nvidea GPU or AMD APU that is otherwise powerfull enough.
That's like saying a 6600GT would be better than an FX 5200 to play cyberpunk. I don't get why people even suggest igpu for low end gaming. They are display outputs at best.
Thanks!
Finally, it took over a year but amd finally gets the kick in the balls they deserve for increasing their Ryzen 5 price from $200 to $300 with the 5600x!
Sad i bought it for 300 lol
@@nicekeyboardalan6972 rip
@@RUclipsTookMyNickname.WhyNot I wish I could have just gotten the 5700g. So much of a better price.
@@nicekeyboardalan6972 I really don't like the 5700g, i thought it was cool after i saw it at first but I realized that AMD crippled it by eliminating pcie 4.0 on it because they were scared it would take away from x sku sales.
Kick in the balls after they already sold a bazillion units? lol.
it nice that amd 3600 still on your list my one has had heavy use over the last 2+ year and still going stong 1000's of hours but yes in 2022 you can now get better CPU for cost so thank you for this
I still GPU bound as still using RX580 and have no hope of not getting new GPU with out getting pocket pick to get new GPU so hold out to end on year finger cross
2 years 😂 My i7 has been running since 2014 on 1ghz OC
@@DuBstep115 oh yeah? My Core2 system has been running since 2008. Not a joke, my brother is currently using it to mine ETH since it has 6 PCIe slots.
RX 580 kings rise up. Bought one in 2019, right before shit started getting expensive. Now its literally 3x the price. Insane
rx580 is a beast, im still going strong and not upgrading anytime soon. It just does everything I want it to do.
Thats funny im in the exact same boat as you buy an RX480. Wish I could get a new gpu
I appreciate that intel continues to offer the best $130 and $200 CPU.
AMD has interesting APU in this category, but thier supply and price level is not consistent.
Future-proofing is worth it when it comes at relatively low incremental cost for something that has a very high likelihood of being useful. Games, software, background tasks and OSes in general growing beyond what 4C8T can comfortably accommodate within the next 5-7 years is practically certain, so getting 6C12T makes sense if you intend to use the system for longer than that. If I include the time my computers spend in the living room when I upgrade my main system and the time they spend serving as my offline backup server after that, I get about 15 years of useful life out of my PCs.
Do you think that It would be beneficial for me to upgrade from my 9100F to the 12400 ?
@@mahmoudelnashar9776 An upgrade is only worth it if you actually need it. If you were contemplating upgrading from a 9100F to a 12100F, that is $300-450 rebuild cost for ~60% more performance, not really worth it IMO. Personally, I'd rather spend the $50-70 extra for the 12400(F) and get ~2.5X as much performance on tap if you can spare the extra cash.
Yet another intel socket, amd is only just moving to am5 for ddr5.
Agree. I'd argue even buying a 6c12t CPU in 2022 is stretching it in the long run. I get the impression that a lot of these DIY PC consumer channels have too narrow a perspective on what a normal, rational consumer realistically would want: longevity and as much usefulness as possible, which you can express in "dollars per month of effective ownership" for example. Instead the focus is on hyping up the latest and "greatest" budget and mid-range parts, which ultimately is geared more towards frequent and incremental upgrades basically to support the "consoom more" mentality (in contrast to what they profess about e-waste). I can't count all the times I've heard "anything more than a i5 600 class is overkill for gaming", overlooking that they're running on synthetically clean installs of Windows, disregard how many want to multitask while maintaining as much performance as possible (though understandably this is hard to test consistently), and not really asking themselves how the CPU will age in 3-5 years vs the more high end parts. Take note I'm not specifically taking a jab at GN here, but the DIY consumer PC-oriented techtubers in general.
I do agree "future proofing" can be unpredictable, but you surely have a much higher chance of getting more actual use out of an i9 or i7 in 5 years than an i5, let alone a 4c4t i3. I obviously also understand people want to spend less money, but I don't understand how they could come to the conclusion that an i5 has more long-term value and is cheaper in terms of "dollars per month of ownership" than an i7 or i9. An i7 you keep for 6 years with the same motherboard is likely to be effectively cheaper than an i5 you upgrade with a new motherboard after 3-4 years. Heck, the i7 12700k is only around $100 more than the i5 12600k with two more P-cores and four more threads. Even if they're close in synthetic benchmarks right now I can't wrap my head around why someone would think that $100 saving in upfront cost would translate to better value in the long run, even for a strictly gaming-focused build. Finally I also understand there are some DIY enthusiasts who like to buy new parts and make new builds all the time just because, but those people are less likely to be long term value-oriented anyway.
@@teardowndan5364
Yes I totally agree that's why I was asking if it's worth it to go from 9100 go 12400, going from a 9th Gen I3 to a 12th Gen one is kinda waste of money lol.
Competition between AMD and Intel are good. I can't wait what AMD comes up next when it comes to budget value wise; it is definitely their turn to either price down their existing 5000 series or new ones.
I think I may have just found the CPU I'll be getting to upgrade from my i5-4460, I'll probably wait for AMD's new lineup and see if it's worth it still but it's looking like a worthy contender. Thanks for the video guys really loving the content lately.
I am waiting for people to start upgrading so that used processors start flooding the second hand market dirt cheap. I need many more for my servers.
@@prashanthb6521 ddr3 is already worth as little as Toilet Paper, soon the 4690k will come
Installed 12400F this week, it is amazing for the price and it runs very cool.
Are u also multi-tasking? Using multiple tabs on chrome, having running 2 screens or even streaming?
How are u experiencing that kind of things while gaming having
@@SpacingMonnik why would I be streaming? I have a real job. Multi-tasking is absolutely fine: I can play CSGO with a few hundred Chrome tabs open easy.
@@00_UU cool! The reason why I call out streaming, is because that’s stresses the multi-task usage of the processor
Thanks!!
Intel really has come back strong with 12th gen, literally beating AMD in price in every CPU segment, and also in performance in most. $180 12400f matches $300 5600x. $260 12600kf beats $360 5800x. $314 12700f beats $540 5900x. AMD needs to stop being greedy and start lowering prices, because people have stopped recommending Zen 3 due to their horrible prices, and instead are recommending Intel again
The ONE advantage AMD has is total platform cost. Intel Mobos are much more expensive than AMD’s.
@@ev2477 that just changed, big oof
tsmc is making it harder
That's the good thing about competition. Price wars
@@ev2477 h610 boards just dropped and are budget friendly
Good use of the GN coaster to hold the CPU!
It would be very good to have a retrospective or modern "security" section or discussion, including revisiting meltdown and spectre exploits and any others which may make the 12th gen better than X generations ago
I think the whole security thing has been so blown out of proportion that it simply isn't even worth talking about outside of those trying to come up with marketing material. Almost all of those "security flaws" required direct access to the hardware making it a non issue for so many people. Even the patches that fixed the issues were shown to have such a minimal impact on performance that it could almost be called margin of error (from the sources i've seen that actually tested it).
So unless you are some secret agent carrying around missile launch keys in a briefcase laptop config, most users need not concern themselves with the buzzphrase "security flaw".
@@b-rant Actually some of the mitigates made a huge performance impact on the cost of syscalls. So network heavy applications (like servers) took some 10-12% hit, for gamers and Photoshop users the impact where perhaps not that big but for us server people it was huge, so huge in fact that we where I work have to run some of the servers with all mitigations removed.
@@Henrik_Holst 12% is likely noticeable without a doubt. Do you have to run the servers without the mitigations for performance reasons, or does something not work?
@@b-rant performance reasons, we have to handle data in sub millisconds and with all mitigations enabled the latency is just too high.
The 12500 actually has a better IGP than the 12400 (770 vs 730) that's the main difference.
Thanks, Steve, for your words about future-proofing. I often get analysis paralysis when it comes to deciding whether to save money now or pay more for what amounts to little difference right now.
just get it when you feel like your current one is noticeably slow. You're not actually going to notice a 10% difference
@@Electroshk Yeah running a 4670K for so long has given me some perspective in that regard. I think a lot of people, myself included, feel that need to upgrade far earlier than we might really need to.
Of course, when it comes to production work, something that you make money off, performance = time = money. Otherwise, though, you can really hold onto stuff a lot longer than you might think (although in my case I may have held onto it for *too* long); certainly a lot longer than the industry and many "hypebeast" type techtubers might suggest.
I've been on the down side of future proofing. I ordered a gaming laptop with the best graphics card available at the time. (8800M GTX) The biggest part of that decision was that laptops generally don't have upgradable hardware, so I wanted performance that would last longer. It wasn't long after that, that the next version of DirectX came out, but that card wasn't compatible with it and I was unable to take advantage of the better visuals it offered. To add salt to the wound, that model came out when the soldering was changed (I think to reduce lead content), and the new formulation couldn't withstand the high heat of that card, causing problems. I never got mine replaced because others still had problems with it after warranty claims.
So I just cut my losses and moved on. I would've been much better off with a lower end card to save money and get more use from it. Since then, I've stuck more to the middle of the road, or slightly better and been pretty happy. I'm currently playing MS Flight Sim 2020 with an i5-8400 and GTX 1060 3GB on a 4K monitor. Even with graphics dialed down low, it still looks great and holds around 45 fps. I don't need super high frame rates to casually enjoy a game.
Recently upgraded my failing PSU with a new one along with a case and this i5-12400F is looking really attractive right now. Still rocking an old i7-4790 with a 1070ti.
yea ive got a 4790k and an asrock z97 extreme4 motherboard and the 12400/b660 mobo combo is looking very attractive to me. curious if i would see significant improvements
I had a i7 4790 with MSI 1070 Gaming X, upgraded to i5 12400f (B660M-A board) and I can say it's a night and day difference, between desktop usage, gaming and CAD work. Very much worth it, even keeping the 'old' GPU. So I can recommend it
Love it. Intel finally being back in the game is great news unless you happen to be a gigantic AMD fanboy.
You know, I am something of an AMD fan boy myself, but I can't deny how good Intel is getting lately.
I think its not yet a great news as AMD hasn't done any price cut in response. It is still a good news tho
@@fakhrimub6760 They don't need to. 5600X to this day is the best-selling and most sought after mid-range CPU. All statistics and charts prove that.
People are always quick to forget - CPU alone means nothing. As it is with Intel - new board is to be factored in the price which suddenly doesn't make the price as appealing. That's exactly where they get you. Wheres for AMD B450 for example supports ALL generations of zen, including the upcoming 3DVCache refresh.
Where's the value again exactly? People can't be that dim.
@@egonieser Stop and take a breath dude.
@@egonieser the difference in price atleast where i live between those two is a Gskill 16Gb 8GBx2 3200 kit ..That is value for sure lol
It's just so ironic that Intel's been dominating the low-end and midrange market for several years at a stretch
It´s not really surprising, at my company we made a survey of the repaired and serviced home computers (not business), it turned out that 95% of laptops/desktops are used for light work, browsing, media consumption and gaming, it´s no real surprise that families overall use their PC´s with entertainment in mind. Very few home users actually use their PC for production purposes including yours truly, streaming is probably the only exception here, most modern CPUs can stream just fine with 1080p gaming. Intel just knows their segment well, fortunately AMD came along and pushed them out of the 4/8 cosiness while lowering prices somewhat.
@@AurioDK yeah, I said it is ironic bc amd always used to be the "poor man's choice", but now if u want low end dual core or heck even good enough 6 core perf, intel delivers, while there's literally nothing on AMD's side. How the turns have tabled.
@@dontmatter4423 problem with all these companies, they get complacent and they relax, AMD did it, the Intel did it.
What I hate is the "thanks AMD for making Intel push" when it should be "bloody AMD were crap so Intel did crap"
@@xFODDERx Have you seen the marketshare and size of Intel vs AMD? Really expecting the much smaller dog to drive the market?
AMD is _literally_ 10 times smaller than Intel, in terms of staff, labs and profits - and yet they manage to keep up to some degree and their marketshare is only 4 times smaller - if anything, they're doing incredibly well given the circumstances. They have never been dealt the same cards.
The only thing AMD can do is crawl out of their 15-20% share to a measly 30% at best, for Intel to pull out a new card out of their sleeves (that has been brewing the whole time in their lab) to push AMD back to its underdog place. Intel calls all the shots here.
What pisses people off is that Intel has been consciously organizing their quasi-monopoly so precisely that they've been untouchable by the regulatory authorities for decades, allowing them to exploit it shamelessly to delay technological advances and fix up the prices, to maximize their margins for the shareholders bonuses and prevent any actual competition.
Just like nVidia has been doing with ATI-now-AMD: organized quasi-monopoly, to hold back new tech and fix up prices, until the domesticated smaller competition catches up, to simply briefly adjust prices down and let a new gen out in the next 6 months, then going back to milking the controlled market, once the smaller dog is beaten back to its corner.
People don't like being milked by monopolies, that's why they rejoice when AMD get a good gen out: finally they can give their money to a company that is more focused on survival than abusing their power like Intel. Even if it's playing right into Intel's plan, for a brief moment it's giving a false hope of having a competitive market.
@@TubeofDestiny wow, hit a nerve.
1) AMD didn't used to have a massively smaller market share, this only happened because with FX they got complacent.
2) AMD used to have many fabs, they segregated GF and subsequently sold off.
3) you need some anti-shill deodorant, you need to learn to look at all the facts and be more objective.
4) some people like myself build with both brands depending on the job spec, so stop seeing hate.
5) Intel are bigger, sure, is that a bad thing? If AMD had great kernel integration than maybe all those company supplied work from home laptops would have an AMD chip.
6) if AMD wanted then they could be bigger than Intel, but like seen here they choose to go balls to the wall rather than supporting the low end user, now as a monopoly expert can you tell me who benefits from not supplying to the poorer clients? Especially when 80% all users are in 2nd world countries......
Face it, all AMD give a crap about is AMD and INTEL will do the same, they don't love you, and they WILL lie to you, 5 year motherboard compatibility??? Sure you try getting a 6800xt, an old board, putting a 5950x and getting SAM etc. Thing is EVERY new chip has technology that has to be shared with it's current chipset, if you can't see that then you are nothing more than a 14 year old trying to justify his second hand 1600 purchase.
Edit* market share is only in Steam, which doesn't cover commercial and none gaming usage, you are so shill you mix 2 separate facts 🤣
Edit** if you think AMD won't milk you, you are obviously to young to remember Bulldozer.
Something left out from the price points:
- mobos prices: amd B550 based mb is ~55$ cheaper than intel b660 based mb (or in other words - you can take amd z570 for price of intel b660) (considering both are ddr4)
- 5600x has unlocked multiplier, while lowest unlocked intel is 12600k. While 12400f is generally cheaper, you pay more for 5600x, the amount is almost the same as intel asks to pay for unlocked 12600k compared to basic 12600 (this is taking into account mb price difference).
Thank you !
unlock or not doesnt fkin matter when the performance is almost equal
in fact overclock is a thing of the past, nobody do that shit anymore with PBO and good turbo
Blender 3.0 is released now and it includes a significantly updated Cycles render engine. I'd be interested to see how the new render engine scales with current CPUs.
I guess it probably moved to use the more cache available thus idk if GN will move to that quite that quickly
Intel needs to release ARC GPUs and save us
2:30 The 12400 has the 730 graphics while the 12500 has the 770. Pretty big difference if you don't have a standalone GPU. ruclips.net/video/w58f0GE1J0E/видео.html
The test I linked shows the 11400 vs the 12600k, so not apples to apples in terms of CPU.
I considered this, but then realized that for the same money of a new MB and this CPU I could drop at least a Ryzen 5800 in my current PC and get more. AMD really did well with AM4 longevity.
For complete from scratch builds however this CPU is sufficient for all the people I usually build and maintain systems. I expect to build at least two new systems on a budget to replace a 6 and 7 year old PC in 2022 and intel is looking good.
Except that a good B660 board + this Intel CPU cost the exact same as a B550 board + 5600x. You have to look at more than a single component price and look at the platform as a whole.
And you're right, it makes even less sense to jump platforms when you probably already have a good mobo. Bios update, sell old CPU, buy 5600x or whatever and it's very cheap to upgrade.
@@thatguythatdoesstuff7448 Yeah, 5000 series works fine in a B450 board. So I literally only have to buy a CPU vs MB + CPU.
Considering the cheapest S1700 board I can buy right now on pre-order is 105 euro and the cheapest 12400 is 200 euro.
For that I can also buy a 5600X (boxed) or a 5700G (tray).
My current CPU (3600) in that machine goes secondhand for 130 - 140 euro (the ones that sell, people try getting 180 for it but those don't sell)
If I sell that first my budget is about 435 euros, for which I would be able to buy a new 5800X.
Of course then I could also sell both my current MB and CPU That would get me maybe an extra 50 euro. I would then have enough for a 105 Euro S1700 plus 285 euro for a S1700 CPU. That would get me an Intel Core i5-12600KF. Not quite sure what to get between a 5800X and that?
Anyway upgrading that last PC will be interesting, the main two machines were upgraded last year in both X470 meant it was a no brainer. My 3700X went from the game PC to the work PC (had the 3600) and the Game PC got a 5800X.
That third PC has a 1080 in it and serves as a remote compute server.
I need a cheaper hobby!
Awesome video, as usual. I had to stop it several times to take a closer look at the graphs.
Still running the 4790k today, OC 4.7ghz. That CPU is a tank.
@@aureliusindomitus9235 I hope that because of faster progress in CPUs, CPUs won't last as long. It's really not fun to use one CPU for whole 8 years. Games for 9th console generation will start demanding more from CPUs. PS5's CPU is 6.4x faster than PS4's CPU.
As a fellow well overclocked 4790k owner I have finally decided he will be retired as I have just bought the 12400f. Found a crazy good value for money bundle. I don't expect to get the same longevity out of this chip - but I am ok with that, in 3/4 years time DDR5 will be performing well and a lot cheaper, there is no reason to buy a more expensive 12th series chip if you are not planning on going full DDR5, at that point it becomes double the price or more.
15:00 this b-roll shot is hilarious, love the creativity you guys have with these.
15:57 feels like an easter egg for the five of us actually watching instead of just listening to Steve ramble.
@@joshcreek9531 LOL, how did I miss that one??
The thing with CPUs is that futureproofing makes most sense for them since 4 years down the line you can buy a good value GPU and dramatically increase the life of the system, while you need to change the whole system if the CPU can’t handle it anymore. I just went from a i5 6500 to 5600x and 6500 was bottlenecking even a 1660s even though it was good back in 2016. 4 cores definitely won’t be enough for games starting anytime now.
or you can buy a secondhand CPU?
@@klyplays If you trust the seller. I have a hard time with expensive components like that that I do not want to have to replace often.
If they ran a CPU at ridiculous thermals, while it may still work when you buy it, the lifespan may be drastically reduced. Maybe you luck out and save the CPU and give it proper cooling and it rewards you with long-term use or maybe it gives up on you and not the person that caused it, and now you're out of money and cpu.
@@klyplays That will hardly be an upgrade due to socket limitation yet still cost a lot? Sure, I could upgrade to 7xxx for little gain and a lot of money.
I have to admit I was on the brink of an AMD 5900x upgrade to my old 7700k pc , but the new 12000 series has me impressed... I now am looking at a 12700K build ..what I'd like to know is what air coolers work well with the Alderlake heat spreader... between GN and hardware unboxed I've gotten most info I need except the cooler.
yeah, i accidentaly bought an 11900k instead of toilet paper, should have looked harder.........
Indeed.
Officially 10 gens behind now. Still going strong on i5-2400. About time to start thinking about a new PC.
Hey Steve could you make a comparison between the 12400 and the 5600G. Graphics cards are impossible to get now so it would be nice to know how these two compare with eathother.
Dude, just search comparisons between Intel UHD 730 vs VEGA 7...
The graphics are way better on 5600g but intel cpu cores are a few percent better...probably still better to go with 5600g if your not gonna get a discrete gpu
@@brucepreston3927 Agree
5600G runs circles even around the very best Intel iGPU. Now, if you have any kind of dedicated GPU at all that's better than a GTX 960/1050 Ti or a RX 560? Get the Intel CPU and get a GPU later on when you can. But if the iGPU is going to be your primary method of gaming as well, stick with the 5600/5700G for now or maybe even wait and see when the RDNA2 APUs from AMD come out-the 6700G-equivalent is supposedly going to have what equates to a GTX-1650 level of performance built into it.
Good review, although I would've liked to hear more about the practical advantages of having +2 cores over the i3.
For example, does the i3 start to struggle while gaming if - heaven forbid - you also run a couple of chrome tabs and spotify and discord and maybe a couple more programs in the background/second monitor?
What if you'd like to stream once every blue moon?
I get that for gaming they're very close, but since PCs aren't consoles, PC gamers don't game the same way consoles do (eg: launching a game and only running the game and nothing else running in the background)
if you stream (even once every blue moon) then it's a very specific need and should think about 6-8 cores
Even for desktop use, a 6 core is noticeably smoother than a 4 core cpu.
@@mikem9536 No, it's not.
For CPU-demanding rendering, compiling, compression, video editing or streaming I'd always try to reach for 6C/12T i5, instead of 4C/8T i3. When talking about similar cores.
Your SW might require specific minimum amount RAM and/or VRAM (GPU) to work smoothly. Or at all. Using HDD instead of SSD is can form a bottleneck.
If your SW can utilize QSV (Intel Quick Sync Video), then regular i.e. "non-F-version" of the CPU might be worth few extra bucks. I'm not sure, how relevant this feature is today. All Intel ****F's lack the iGPU and thus also QSV.
Another advantage of iGPU is to be able to ensure whether or not your external GPU is broken.
For regular office tasks, net surfing, paying bills and perhaps even (low-res) gaming (of older games) an iGPU can be powerful enough. You can always buy external GPU later.
Modern (Nvidia RTX) GPUs can be a great help for rendering (OptiX with Blender) and game streaming (NVENC). Being much more powerful than using your CPU alone.
Chrome tabs, Widgets etc. _shouldn't_ have any practical effect when gaming. Well, on full screen gaming anyways. In that kind of scenarios OS _shouldn't_ have any reason to constantly update those tabs, widgets etc.
In general, when gaming with middle-class GPU @1440p, your GPU is the most likely bottle-neck. Perhaps @1080p, too.
@@eukariootti1 In general, gaming at 1440p, even with a 3080, the GPU is the bottleneck. Any comparison I've seen has extremely similar results from lower end CPUs to high end CPUs. You need enough GPU overhead to see a difference in CPU comparisons at 1440p.
I think the only CPU comparison I've seen on 1440p res where there were significant differences was using a 3090.
Finally we've reached the moment when both are good.
... and intel are the best value option.
Intel is better at this moment.
@@nkallen123 only if you're not already on AM4
but intel is the best value option.... they leap frog my dude. One will always be better than the other at the time you are looking to upgrade
Steve looks baked af in the thumbnail. Nice.
So happy competition is back in the cpu market. I was completely let down by AMD's 5000 series prices and now that intel is back amd will have to respond with a price cut or get smeared in sales.
Yes. Before you say it, I'm aware there is a chip shortage but if INTEL of all companies can (and I can't believe I'm about to say this) charge LESS during said shortage, AMD has no excuses.
Actually, because Intel have it's own factories, they can provide more chips than AMD, who needs share the TSMC factory with the entire industry. Makes complete sense to Intel charge less than AMD right now, who was behind needs to charge less to regain market share, and a least until ZEN 4 comes out, is working.
You do realize Intel is one of the reasons there is a chip shortage. Not the only reason of course, but they did play a part. Regardless AMD doesn't have to change anything. Reminder 5000 series came out in November 2020. Yes. 2020 over a year ago. AMD answer will be the Zen 4. We will see if it can live up to par.
@@marcus3445 xx400 were always sub~around $200. Intel pricing didn't change.
Not really. B660 prices are ridiculous, 12400 with the crappiest B660 DS3H costs as much as 5600X with MSI B450 APro/Mortar/Gaming Plus or B550 Pro-VDH. AMD doesn't have to drop prices, they're even.
In short, if you use the CPU for gaming and common uses, not for making money, i3 12100f will be the right choice.
That is the answer I need. Thank you for the review! Help me a lot.
would be nice to see how some older OCed CPUs perform on the charts. A 5GHz 10600k for example.
"Older" lmao
@@stefanpastravanu1493 its 2 gens older than the current one, older does not mean old
Finally, a video under 20 minutes.
Hopefully this value trend moves into the GPU market as well.
That won’t happen until supply is bigger than demand.
as long as crypto is around, that ain't happening
Great little chip, been waiting for these charts, thanks Steve.
That 12100f is seriously impressive
Thank you, these benchmarks and thoughts are incredibly helpful. As somebody on a budget who does a mix of gaming and rendering/compiling/etc I couldn't make up my mind, but this has helped me see that the extra bit of cost will probably be worth it as a timesaver in the long run.
I'd love to upgrade my R5 3600, but the prices just haven't made any sense. Hopefully these CPUs will help get AMDs prices down.
AMD won't lower prices too much right now. They can't compete against Alder Lake if people are buying a new system but if you are already in the AM4 socket it's easier and probably cheaper to upgrade in-house. They'll just roll with the punches until AM5 and Zen 4, then I'm sure they'll have some budget options to fight Intel for the lower end.
$260-280 for a 5600x is not bad
AMD deadass didnt release anything below a 5600x so... if in the next gen we see a non-x r5 theres your upgrade. Doubtful for the 5000 series
Nah, probably hold onto it. When I was on my 4670K I was really tempted to upgrade to the 3600, but then the 5600X came along and made it a no-brainer. There's always plenty of nice-to-have computer upgrades available, but it's always best to stretch for the real-deal upgrades.
@@RafitoOoO The 5800x drops to $340 - $300ish once in a while.
I just bought a 12400f for 169 at newegg, i feel happy for my next build
Hey Steve ! Is it true that streaming requires an extra 2 cores and thus if one was to build a new system for gaming + streaming, would a 4 core be below requirements ? Would that make the 12400(f) the go-to budget build ?
What GPU do you have?
If you use GPU hardware encoding (Nvidia NVENC for example) the CPU impact is minimal so a 12100F would definitely be sufficient. Although Intel iGPUs should have quicksync for encoding which does the same, could be a reason to get one with iGPU (so not the F version).
Not sure if Radeon GPUs have hardware encoders (maybe AV1?), have no experience with those
If you have none of this and let the CPU brute force the video stream (software encoding) then you would need more cpu grunt to avoid sacrificing fps.
It's not about the amount of cores but about total CPU power (an 8C/16T Ryzen 7 1700 is not as fast as the i3-12100 even in multithreaded...)
Love the 4670/4790 comparison at the end. I just "upgraded" to the 4790 in my old-ass PC to make sure it wouldn't die playing Elden Ring. I figure this gets me another year before I build a new one.
Would love to see a comparison between the i5-12500 that has an 770 integrated graphics against a Ryzen 5600g. Nowadays the integrated graphics are pretty solid and more so with the prices of graphics card.
Good content as always.
Thanks Steve! This confirmed my purchase is worth it for being well rounded for games and mainly production
It's nice to see the entry level back for cpus. Now if Intel could just follow up with Arc.
Now just wait a year for entry level motherboards.
@Gamers Nexus Quick Query at 2:28 you showed the Specs chart and commented about the 12500 just having higher boost clocks, 2.5 however I also noticed that base clock is 3.0 against 2.5, also it had a different UHD GPU 770 rather than 730. Whilst I wouldn't be buying any AlderLake CPU's (10850K is plenty for me atm) I do wonder if there is any difference. I realise that none of these onboard graphics do gaming is there any/much improvement claimed ?
Intel is fighting back aggressively. Good to see. AMD badly need to lower their prices at this point. They're now out of the running for a lot of people's builds.
Not really though, B660 mobos are so ridiculously expensive that 12400 platform costs as much as 5600X.
They are akready for me. I got a 12400F and im putting it into an H670. My next upgrade will just be a 12700. Im buying a PC now and this "low end" CPU pairs so well with my 3060ti that ive made sure my next upgrade can use the same socket.
Always enjoy the information your team provides , please keep it coming.
In my country of New Zealand our computer store calls intels parts "great value for the money".
That's what they used to say about AMD before Zen 3 came out and it's easy to see why things have changed now.
But it's NOT good value because you need to buy a new board too. Any value you save on the CPU you fork out for the motherboard. And if you want to Overclock - bye bye wallet.
@@egonieser yes, AMD motherboards are free. Can you let me know where they are handing them out?
Cheers.
@@egonieser "you need to buy a new board too".
This comment is coming from the assumption the person is already on Zen. What about new builders or someone on something older?
Yeah, if you wanna upgrade your 2700X, obviously you'd go Zen 3, but you can't just make the assumption that that's the case.
Der8aur has discovered overclocking abilities with the 12400 on some boards. Basically turned it into a 12700k/12900k going to almost 5.3 ghz. Should check out the video.
It would be ironic if the Raptor Lake 13400 doesn't let you overclock it, which means the older 12400 would perform better.
@@avatarion big thing first is to see if intel removes it as a patch or leaves it alone. Be nice if the put this on lower end boards.
@@LGLoops Too late. Nobody is forcing you to update anything.
The i5 12400 seems to be the best budget option for gaming... Cool cpu i have to say...
Motherboards are not exactly budget though.
@@sic22l no one intel chipset mainboard are really cheap 🙃
Better example is 5820k vs 4790k, the 6 cores running at 4.5ghz carried me from 2014 to 2021. Also ddr4 vs ddr3
...grats on the 2 extra cores, must have been fantastic for the time.
12700 next? That thing's benches are pretty nuts. You basically are just paying for the oc ability with the 12700k by comparison.
Stg if Microcenter marks it down to 300 I'm activating my protection plan on my 12600k.
The K cpu's never made much sense, modern CPU's are very close to their peak performance stock anyway, also you get a cooler with the non-K cpu
@@sowa705 They used to make sense, not much anymore.
A suggestion for future proofing testing could be running the new unreal engine 5 demos like the city demos. I know a vast majority of games will be using ue5 and it would be a good indication of that perhaps? I know that the ue5 demo I'm talking about was not available at that time but still worth considering.
For the 12500, I noticed it has a higher base frequency. Do you think that would have any significant effect on performance?
You are never going to see base frequency unless you are hitting a thermal/power limit
The 12500 also has an upgraded iGPU in it, but you shouldn't worry about the base frenquency...
great, I was looking forward to this video
These low end CPUs are looking good
Really looking forward to upgrading to Alderlake this month. This settles it right here. If my gaming performance will trade blows CPU wise with a 9900k then count me in for a CPU that costs 200.
COme on man. the 9900K is 8 core 16 thread. The i5 is non overclockable and is 6 core 12 thread. You will be getting a downgrade and stutters when all the cores get used up compared to the 9900K
The CPU itself is good value overall however when you consider the price of the motherboard. Currently the cheapest decent motherboard is an H670 priced at 160$ + the 12400 gets you to 360$ which is pretty close to a decent B550 motherboard with a similar feature set and the 5600X which costs about 400$. Mind you with the 5600X and B550 you can also overclock. While the H670 only allows for memory overclocking and the 12400 is of course locked as well.
Intel fanboys are always blind to the fact what they think they save for a cheaper CPU they fork out in another mobo. B450/X470 is going to continue supporting even the upcoming Zen3 refresh. Now that is real value.
You don't need a fucking H670 for a 12400.
@@Wylie288 that's the second cheapest motherboard available that half decent. The cheapest one only has 2 memory slots shitty vrms and little in the matters of headers and expansion.
From the Intel chart at 2:35, the i5-12500 also has an upgraded iGPU, the 770 vs the 730.
Imagine how pissed EVGA must be that they paid for an ad of their AMD motherboard and it runs on a video titled 'AMD Defeat''
Thanks Steve.
Good job intel! Now do the same in GPU market please!
You do realize we have a GLOBAL sillicon shortage right? RN price to performance ratio determines price and nothing else. Supply can't meet demand for MSRP to matter.
Nice info guys, thanks! 😀
It would be really interesting to see a K sku in the 12100 and 12400. Pushing those cores up would probably really put it at parity with more expensive cpus for gaming workloads.
I had a 4790 from 2014 to 2021 for that exact reason mentioned. Everyone told me go i5 and save $100. My 4790k is still in use in my living room / backup gaming pc. Paired with 32gb of cl10 ddr3 2400mhz and at 4.6ghz it's not exactly slow for it's age. Actually want to replace it with a 12100F just to dabble with the new cpu. My main rig is on a 10900 and hopefully that get's me similar life to my prior 4790k.
Is there a reason you didn't include more 9th/10th gen benchmarks? It's hard to gauge the 12th gen against anything that actually matters performance wise without it, given how much of an abomination most of the CPUs that gen were. Performance/$ the lower end chips were better, but if you're a skylake++++++++ owner (which is most people using intel rn) it makes it hard to judge the value of an upgrade. Including the 10900k and 9900k was nice, but those aren't particularly direct comparison points with the CPU being reviewed today, relative to what people who buy this kind of CPU prince point would realistically have.
They didn't include it because they need to run them again. Every time a new platform comes out they need to re-run everything and recalibrate all the data. They only have so much time to do that before the review becomes irrelavent.
@@XDSDDLord I get that, my point is that people who have the platforms they did test, probably aren't interested in upgrading to a mid/low end CPU. Had intel actually gotten faster with the 11 series it might have been useful, but they honestly didn't. Just makes it hard to gauge for the vast majority of people who'd be looking at a piece like this. Usually GN is good about this, but they only included it in a few spots. IDK maybe i'm just forgetting, seems like they usually cover their bases on that stuff
16:00 That's how CPU should be packaged. Definitely seals in the flavor.
Very promising CPU. Sadly availability and prices of B660/H670 boards is still bad, making 12400+(cheapest)B660 370€, while 5600X+B550 at 380€ still is faster and even offers better value.
I hope B660/H670 boards and Zen 3 CPUs will come down in price soon.
which B550 board would you recommend? There's a lot of difference in pricing
Thank you for including the i9 9900 K
In here 3600 still cost around $300,
Don't ask 5600x or 5800x,
But 12400 + b660 combo kill them all
price H610 not kill anybody
It doesn't, 12400+B660 combo costs as much as 5600X+B450.
You need DDR5 on 12400 to match or slightly pass 5600x performance...It is not worth it unless you go for top end i9 and you need all the performance.
Been waiting for this one. My R5 3600 is starting to show its age. Let's see if we can get 1 more season out of it. Will upgrade next cpu cycle.
wait for Zen 4 and meteor lake. if the rumors and leaks are correct we could get another 25 to 30 % uplift.
I have a feeling AMD 6 core 12 thread for $200 is coming back next gen.
It's already here - it's called the Ryzen 5 3600 ;)
In your dreams. If 5800X3D is any indication, 3D cache alone will add $100 to every CPU, and without it, AMD will not be able to bead Intel at performance by the time both Zen4 and Raptor Lake are out.
I wouldn't be surprised, now that Intel is actually giving competition in that arena. Let's go, Intel!
With Nvidia 4000 series, Radeon 7000 series, AND Zen 4 all competing for TSMC 5nm capacity, I'd be surprised if AMD can even have the same availability they currently have. I seriously doubt AMD releases a sub $300 chip next gen given their resource constraints. If anything, maybe they repackage some Zen 3 or use some TSMC n7 capacity
But the 12400 is 6 core 12 thread for $180....
The differnce between i5-12400 and i5-12500 is not only core clock boost, but vPro support. The i5-XX500 in any generation is an SKU for the business desktops.
Intel back on top. What a weird turn of events…
Wonder how their GPUs are going to turn out as well. The new CEO seems to have really gotten Intel back on track.
Not on top really, they just go back and forth with their yearly releases.
I mean, they never lose the top in servers, just the consumer gaming market, and they still keep the laptops sales (thanks to amd prioritizing the consoles APU productions), in the beginning of the pandemic the most sold in the gaming market was weirdly the laptops.
Hence Intel never really lose the top completely, but people act like it :/, honestly I was expecting the Rembrandt APU last year, zen3+ I still taking it's time and Intel is going full on with the 12 gen in both desktop and laptops markets.
I'm saying all this but still wanting my next CPU to be from AMD.
@ On top because AMD didn't release 5300X. They completely ignored the $100-250 market making the cheapest cpu $300
For now, AMD needs to lower their prices and the Ryzen 7000 series is on the horizon. I hope there will be more serious competition from both, prices need to drop, hard.
I future proofed with my i7-4770K and it's still keeping me going today!
I would hope a CPU released more than a year later has a non-negligible improvement in price to performance. A shame intel's reign led to this sort of improvement to be anything but the norm.
The 10900k is actually impressively good.
ive been rocking mine since release day and it still is as fast as day 1.
Will definitely not need a change until atleast 14900k-15900k comes...
Shows how far AMD has come that this is what Intel has to resort to to even come close. Excited for Ryzen 7000.
The 12400 is a great chip, but man that 12100 is amazing value.
Every single B660 motherboard costs more than 12100 which makes it not that great value anymore.
just sold my gaming PC which had a 2600x with a 1660. After watching this video, I will be going for the 12400. going to pair it with a 3060 for 1080p gaming. I love AMD and I know they live up to the hype. But at this time, the 12400 seems to be the winner over the 5600x my opinion. Thanks for sharing.
Not really. B660 prices are ridiculous, 12400 with the crappiest B660 DS3H costs as much as 5600X with MSI B450 APro/Mortar/Gaming Plus or B550 Pro-VDH. As a platform Intel is not cheaper. It's not faster either.
@@sic22l ASRock B660M-HDV LGA 1700 is $95 on NewEgg. That Mobo+12400 is cheaper than a 5600X by itself.
Oh no don't go with the 3060. Get the 3060ti. The 3060 shouldn't even be considered a 30 series card. Save the extra $100 its well worth it.