Discussion Intel Core i5-12400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 5600X Face-Off: The Gaming Value Showdown By Paul Alcorn

LuxZg

Distinguished
Dec 29, 2007
160
8
18,685
0
Intel Core i5-12400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 5600X Face-Off: The Gaming Value Showdown
By Paul Alcorn

Link: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i5-12400-vs-amd-ryzen-5-5600x-ryzen-5-5600g-cpu-face-off

Here's an article... And I can't get over it this morning.

What I dislike the most is touting 12400 as value proposition with good feature set when in fact it's either a "good value, comparable to competition lacking new features" or is "feature full but overly expensive"

Why so?
DDR5 is elephant in the room as the article itself admits and dismisses it right away.

But PCIe 5.0 is just as big elephant noone talks about! All articles, this one including, talk of PCIe 5.0 in Alder Lake as if it's a feature... Yet it's AN OPTION!
Starting with review of B660 motherboard: https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/msi-mag-b660m-mortar-wifi-ddr4
... If you read carefully after mentioning PCIe 5.0 few times it ends up as - NOT BEING THERE AT ALL! And this is currently cheapest MBO, costing me 228$ (article puts it at 189$).

So not to be overly long... Let's sum it up:
12400F + entry level B660
  • no E-cores
  • no DDR5
  • no PCIe 5.0 AT ALL
  • no overclocking
  • slightly higher power consumption
  • 462$ for MBO+CPU
5600X + budget MBO
  • no E-cores
  • no DDR5
  • no PCIe 5.0
  • overclocking enabled
  • best power consumption
  • slightly lower performance depending on load
  • 409$ for MBO+CPU
So here I am asking - where's value proposition? AMD wins. Where is better feature set and connectivity? A tie (or Intel wins but costs double the money). Is performance really a win either, if AMD wins 1440p gaming and Intel wins 1080p by error of margin, and application benches are a tie?

IMHO, if we level a playing field, use 12400F vs 5600X (no IGP in either), use same DDR4, use MBO with 4 DIMM slots and at least one M.2, use boxed cooler, suddenly whole thing is actually a tie, neither platform wins really. Yet AMD's one had been long in the market and Intel is barely doing a tie with new release.

Or if you go the DDR5 + PCIe 5.0 route, then Intel wins on features, but is so expensive it's not really a midrange proposition anymore, so they get a "+" for features and "-" for value.

Please Mr. Alcorn tell me I'm wrong.

P.s. feel free to use your local pricing (tax included) if you don't believe my numbers.
 
Why so?
DDR5 is elephant in the room as the article itself admits and dismisses it right away.

But PCIe 5.0 is just as big elephant noone talks about! All articles, this one including, talk of PCIe 5.0 in Alder Lake as if it's a feature... Yet it's AN OPTION!
Starting with review of B660 motherboard: https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/msi-mag-b660m-mortar-wifi-ddr4
... If you read carefully after mentioning PCIe 5.0 few times it ends up as - NOT BEING THERE AT ALL! And this is currently cheapest MBO, costing me 228$ (article puts it at 189$).
As you already said a 660 board will not add anything to the performance of the 12400, no O/C, so why go with that?!
s1700 mobos with ddr4 start from ~90€ in europe, with the cheapest 660 board being at 110.
https://www.idealo.de/preisvergleich/ProductCategory/3018F102290728.html?sortKey=minPrice
 

LuxZg

Distinguished
Dec 29, 2007
160
8
18,685
0
Yes, with just 2 DIMM slots and even less features. If you want to go that way, you need to compare it to 25€ AM4 boards. Using same price search site you have 280€ for 5600X and 184€ for 12400F. Again, if you look at CPU+MBO with similar features you end up with more or less a tie on value. And you do lose on both PCIe and DDR "upgrade" as I already wrote. So all things being equal, there isn't really any extra value in 12400 when you look at the whole package. Just a personal preference. Edit: and if you use several price sources you will see that depending on region and country Intel/AMD price swings to one or other camp, but it's usually in +/-20€ so I call it a tie to make it easier
 

Amddefector

Prominent
Sep 5, 2020
274
27
720
6
There's cheaper boards available now for the 1700 platform. Admittedly they are mainly micro atx and not full of features like the atx boards but it's the same with amd boards. Spend $100 on a board and your going to get $100 worth go with the better chipset and you heading back towards $200 again. Don't get me wrong amd are good they had the lead on Intel and probably will in the future but that lead comes with a price! For years people have complained Intel are over priced and yea they wasn't wrong. Now amd are overpriced. For comparison, what I was gonna pay for a 5800x I got a 12600 and a mb, ok it was 60 bucks more than the 5800 but if I wanted to get the most outta the 5800 I would have paid another $200 for a mb as my cheaper b450 board wouldn't cut the mustard. It wouldn't even run a 3900x. As for ddr5 and pcie 5.0 not really relevant right now but in the future when it is, how much will a next gen amd cpu a mb cost that can run ddr5 and pcie 5.0? Nobody knows. Yet! I could bring my old 2700x in for comparison, it's more expensive than a 12400 and the 12400 will run ddr4 3600 no problem whereas the 2700 won't but you can't really compare a older generation amd cpu to Intel's new generation. Wait until am5 drops then we'll see.
 

Nighthawk117

Notable
Sep 27, 2021
880
237
890
43
Intel Core i5-12400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 5600X Face-Off: The Gaming Value Showdown
By Paul Alcorn

Link: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i5-12400-vs-amd-ryzen-5-5600x-ryzen-5-5600g-cpu-face-off

Here's an article... And I can't get over it this morning.

What I dislike the most is touting 12400 as value proposition with good feature set when in fact it's either a "good value, comparable to competition lacking new features" or is "feature full but overly expensive"

Why so?
DDR5 is elephant in the room as the article itself admits and dismisses it right away.

But PCIe 5.0 is just as big elephant noone talks about! All articles, this one including, talk of PCIe 5.0 in Alder Lake as if it's a feature... Yet it's AN OPTION!
Starting with review of B660 motherboard: https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/msi-mag-b660m-mortar-wifi-ddr4
... If you read carefully after mentioning PCIe 5.0 few times it ends up as - NOT BEING THERE AT ALL! And this is currently cheapest MBO, costing me 228$ (article puts it at 189$).

So not to be overly long... Let's sum it up:
12400F + entry level B660
  • no E-cores
  • no DDR5
  • no PCIe 5.0 AT ALL
  • no overclocking
  • slightly higher power consumption
  • 462$ for MBO+CPU
5600X + budget MBO
  • no E-cores
  • no DDR5
  • no PCIe 5.0
  • overclocking enabled
  • best power consumption
  • slightly lower performance depending on load
  • 409$ for MBO+CPU
So here I am asking - where's value proposition? AMD wins. Where is better feature set and connectivity? A tie (or Intel wins but costs double the money). Is performance really a win either, if AMD wins 1440p gaming and Intel wins 1080p by error of margin, and application benches are a tie?

IMHO, if we level a playing field, use 12400F vs 5600X (no IGP in either), use same DDR4, use MBO with 4 DIMM slots and at least one M.2, use boxed cooler, suddenly whole thing is actually a tie, neither platform wins really. Yet AMD's one had been long in the market and Intel is barely doing a tie with new release.

Or if you go the DDR5 + PCIe 5.0 route, then Intel wins on features, but is so expensive it's not really a midrange proposition anymore, so they get a "+" for features and "-" for value.

Please Mr. Alcorn tell me I'm wrong.

P.s. feel free to use your local pricing (tax included) if you don't believe my numbers.
What sort of GPU do you want to pair with it?
 

Zerk2012

Titan
Ambassador
Yes, with just 2 DIMM slots and even less features. If you want to go that way, you need to compare it to 25€ AM4 boards. Using same price search site you have 280€ for 5600X and 184€ for 12400F. Again, if you look at CPU+MBO with similar features you end up with more or less a tie on value. And you do lose on both PCIe and DDR "upgrade" as I already wrote. So all things being equal, there isn't really any extra value in 12400 when you look at the whole package. Just a personal preference. Edit: and if you use several price sources you will see that depending on region and country Intel/AMD price swings to one or other camp, but it's usually in +/-20€ so I call it a tie to make it easier
Not sure what your talking about everybody don't live where you do prices will vary depending on where you live.

Using 5600X and 12400F both with budget boards.

PCPartPicker Part List

Type|Item|Price
:----|:----|:----
CPU | AMD Ryzen 5 5600X 3.7 GHz 6-Core Processor | $301.35 @ Amazon
Motherboard | Gigabyte B450M DS3H V2 Micro ATX AM4 Motherboard | $79.99 @ B&H
| Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts |
| Total | $381.34
| Generated by PCPartPicker 2022-01-24 09:03 EST-0500 |

PCPartPicker Part List

Type|Item|Price
:----|:----|:----
CPU | Intel Core i5-12400F 2.5 GHz 6-Core Processor | $179.99 @ B&H
Motherboard | Asus PRIME B660M-A D4 Micro ATX LGA1700 Motherboard | $139.99 @ Amazon
| Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts |
| Total | $319.98
| Generated by PCPartPicker 2022-01-24 09:05 EST-0500 |
 
Yes, with just 2 DIMM slots and even less features. If you want to go that way, you need to compare it to 25€ AM4 boards. Using same price search site you have 280€ for 5600X and 184€ for 12400F. Again, if you look at CPU+MBO with similar features you end up with more or less a tie on value. And you do lose on both PCIe and DDR "upgrade" as I already wrote. So all things being equal, there isn't really any extra value in 12400 when you look at the whole package. Just a personal preference. Edit: and if you use several price sources you will see that depending on region and country Intel/AMD price swings to one or other camp, but it's usually in +/-20€ so I call it a tie to make it easier
But it's not the $50 difference of intel being more expensive either, it's more or less the same with the intel system being a bit faster.
Also a 25€ mobo will come with a bios that will not run the 5600x, you would have to buy a second CPU just to make it work for the 5600x, increasing the finally price by quite a bit and making it much more difficult with a chance to kill your mobo, all fun stuff.
 

LuxZg

Distinguished
Dec 29, 2007
160
8
18,685
0
There's cheaper boards available now for the 1700 platform. Admittedly they are mainly micro atx and not full of features like the atx boards but it's the same with amd boards. Spend $100 on a board and your going to get $100 worth go with the better chipset and you heading back towards $200 again. Don't get me wrong amd are good they had the lead on Intel and probably will in the future but that lead comes with a price! For years people have complained Intel are over priced and yea they wasn't wrong. Now amd are overpriced. For comparison, what I was gonna pay for a 5800x I got a 12600 and a mb, ok it was 60 bucks more than the 5800 but if I wanted to get the most outta the 5800 I would have paid another $200 for a mb as my cheaper b450 board wouldn't cut the mustard. It wouldn't even run a 3900x. As for ddr5 and pcie 5.0 not really relevant right now but in the future when it is, how much will a next gen amd cpu a mb cost that can run ddr5 and pcie 5.0? Nobody knows. Yet! I could bring my old 2700x in for comparison, it's more expensive than a 12400 and the 12400 will run ddr4 3600 no problem whereas the 2700 won't but you can't really compare a older generation amd cpu to Intel's new generation. Wait until am5 drops then we'll see.
Partly agree, specially with AMD increasing prices

But again, 100$ 1700 mbo compares more to 25$ AM4 boards. That 75$ mbo difference spends bug chunk of CPU savings (if not all, and sometimes even more, depending on the store/region/country). And you could've read several articles lately where 30$ AM4 MBO runs top end CPUs. I do try to be sensible, most people buying 12400/5600X will aim for mid/high build, with discrete GPU, 4 DIMMs, and M.2 drive at very least. So you'd rarely see a 30$/€ mbo paired to those CPUs. And AM4 can offer a lot of boards under 100$ with plenty features and good CPU support whereas you are gonna end up with close to 200 for 1700 socket and similar features.

And back to PCIe 5.0, pls read article about a "showdown" linked in first post... It doesn't point to PCIe 5.0 caveats NOT ONCE. Doesn't warn potential buyers AT ALL. But it touts it as advantage. Yet that "advantage" doesn't come guaranteed. It's an option, and will require springing for 300$ boards. Now you're pairing 185$ CPU with 300$ MBO. But article doesn't say it. Rarely any article/review about 12400 mentions it. They mention B660/H670 as cheaper but still great options, mention PCIe 5.0, and you're left with impression those boards will have 5.0. As it's offered by CPU. But again, noone says it's just optional.

Edit: sure enough, I will indeed wait and see about AM5 and if AMD ends up stupid or they wake up a bit
 

Zerk2012

Titan
Ambassador
If I already have a B450 motherboard and 1st gen Ryzen what sort of value is there in changing to the Intel CPU system?
From my prices not much difference, and you could sell your 1st and motherboard.

People go overboard into the AMD VS Intel. Both good processors who really cares when their a small difference either way.

If I had to have the best of the best I could upgrade every year instead of ever 5 years or so.
 
Last edited:
Partly agree, specially with AMD increasing prices

But again, 100$ 1700 mbo compares more to 25$ AM4 boards. That 75$ mbo difference spends bug chunk of CPU savings (if not all, and sometimes even more, depending on the store/region/country). And you could've read several articles lately where 30$ AM4 MBO runs top end CPUs. I do try to be sensible, most people buying 12400/5600X will aim for mid/high build, with discrete GPU, 4 DIMMs, and M.2 drive at very least. So you'd rarely see a 30$/€ mbo paired to those CPUs. And AM4 can offer a lot of boards under 100$ with plenty features and good CPU support whereas you are gonna end up with close to 200 for 1700 socket and similar features.

And back to PCIe 5.0, pls read article about a "showdown" linked in first post... It doesn't point to PCIe 5.0 caveats NOT ONCE. Doesn't warn potential buyers AT ALL. But it touts it as advantage. Yet that "advantage" doesn't come guaranteed. It's an option, and will require springing for 300$ boards. Now you're pairing 185$ CPU with 300$ MBO. But article doesn't say it. Rarely any article/review about 12400 mentions it. They mention B660/H670 as cheaper but still great options, mention PCIe 5.0, and you're left with impression those boards will have 5.0. As it's offered by CPU. But again, noone says it's just optional.

Edit: sure enough, I will indeed wait and see about AM5 and if AMD ends up stupid or they wake up a bit
You still need a second cpu to flash the 25€ board and the cheapest would be a 80€ 3 1200.
 

LuxZg

Distinguished
Dec 29, 2007
160
8
18,685
0
I'm trying to find the better value and hoped someone would have input for that.
Honestly, if you want to go to something like 12400 then don't switch. You can just upgrade CPU to 5600X and save yourself lots of hassle.

Or as others said, if performance is still ok for you, don't upgrade yet at all.

I'm still on Skylake and I'm not upgrading until I see what will AM5 bring in late in 2022.
 
Honestly, if you want to go to something like 12400 then don't switch. You can just upgrade CPU to 5600X and save yourself lots of hassle.

Or as others said, if performance is still ok for you, don't upgrade yet at all.

I'm still on Skylake and I'm not upgrading until I see what will AM5 bring in late in 2022.
That's the sort of analysis really lacking when talk turns to 'better value'.
 

Amddefector

Prominent
Sep 5, 2020
274
27
720
6
Partly agree, specially with AMD increasing prices

But again, 100$ 1700 mbo compares more to 25$ AM4 boards. That 75$ mbo difference spends bug chunk of CPU savings (if not all, and sometimes even more, depending on the store/region/country). And you could've read several articles lately where 30$ AM4 MBO runs top end CPUs. I do try to be sensible, most people buying 12400/5600X will aim for mid/high build, with discrete GPU, 4 DIMMs, and M.2 drive at very least. So you'd rarely see a 30$/€ mbo paired to those CPUs. And AM4 can offer a lot of boards under 100$ with plenty features and good CPU support whereas you are gonna end up with close to 200 for 1700 socket and similar features.

And back to PCIe 5.0, pls read article about a "showdown" linked in first post... It doesn't point to PCIe 5.0 caveats NOT ONCE. Doesn't warn potential buyers AT ALL. But it touts it as advantage. Yet that "advantage" doesn't come guaranteed. It's an option, and will require springing for 300$ boards. Now you're pairing 185$ CPU with 300$ MBO. But article doesn't say it. Rarely any article/review about 12400 mentions it. They mention B660/H670 as cheaper but still great options, mention PCIe 5.0, and you're left with impression those boards will have 5.0. As it's offered by CPU. But again, noone says it's just optional.

Edit: sure enough, I will indeed wait and see about AM5 and if AMD ends up stupid or they wake up a bit
Yea I agree with you. I think even the a320 supports the latest amd cpu's nowadays but why would anyone want to go down that route. You can pair a dodge hellcat engine with a aztec but your never gonna get no where near engines full potential. If we're talking quad core ryzen 3's I've got no problem going with a $50 board. Rule out the likes of msi and alike. Judging by the quality of the msi aio cooler I'm just about to swap out I wouldn't waste my money on their mb's. If I was to buy a 12400 I would go with the z690 chipset and if I was to buy a ryzen 5 or above I would go with the x570 chipset. I wouldn't make the mistake of going with the cheaper chipset again to run a fairly decent cpu.

Also I agree with you. ddr5 and pcie 5.0. Non existent on the cheaper Intel boards! But again I wouldn't go with the cheaper option especially for gaming. I wouldn't even go for 12400 when the 12600kf is the same price as a 5600x. Onboard graphics isn't really an option I would consider either. There's no such thing as value for money gaming where onboard graphics are concerned. The built in gpu is gonna be obsolete long before the cpu so it's just a waste of money in my opinion.

The reason my rig ain't packing a amd cpu is problems with memory compatibility ontop of mind boggling power options In the bios and BSODs and cost. I assembled my Intel rig, switched it on. Enabled xmp and it run faultlessly and has continued to do so since then and it's always been that way with intel. I've tried amd several times over the last few decades and it's never been easy. Last year I tried 3 amd cpu and mb's and each time had problems that couldn't be solved, actually that's not true! the ryzen 3 3200 that my youngest has with value ram and gigabyte a320m works fine. He's just always complaining it's really slow. But it does drive a gtx 1660s no problem. It came as a bundle on offer for around 200! That's value.

I'm always prepared for a upgrade. Let's wait and see what am5 has to offer.
 

Nighthawk117

Notable
Sep 27, 2021
880
237
890
43
I would personally choose the 12400F if I was building from scratch. It's much cheaper than the 5600X so I can get a better quality motherboard for same money. The 5600X is the same price as the 12600K where I live, I'd much rather have the latter.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY