i3-12300 performance on Geekbench 5
i3-12300 performance on Geekbench 5
I normally check these numbers and consider Intel IPC gains for the 10th generation. I looked at the best quadcore from Alder Lake (i3-12300) and compared it to the i7-7700 (non-K). Both single and multi-threaded speeds jumped about twice, which is impressive. When I matched it with the 2700X, the i3-12300 still outperformed it, especially in multi-threaded tasks. Against the 5900HX, it was only a bit slower—half the cores and a drop of 0.2GHz—but that’s still significant. I also found an overclocked 12300 running at 5GHz with a 17% boost in single-thread performance. The stock 12900K at 5.2GHz was only 2.5GHz faster, which is expected for the same architecture. So yes, these differences are quite normal based on the data I found.
Many programs and tests don't perform well when spread across numerous cores. In reality, most don't handle it effectively. I'm not sure how Geekbench functions, but it seems unlikely the processor fully utilized all 16 cores in the 12900K. That's why a variety of benchmarks are necessary to accurately assess CPU performance. The 5950X still leads in 7-Zip compression, even though the 12900K might be 15% quicker in certain games. Which CPU is superior? It really depends on your needs. If you're not gaming or running tasks that require many cores, both the 12300 and 12900K will behave similarly. The 12900K offers higher clock speed and more L3 cache, but if your application isn't sensitive to those features, results will be comparable. Still in other tests, the 12900K will outperform significantly. The key takeaway is avoid relying on a single benchmark to evaluate a CPU unless it truly matches your intended use.
Spoiler: Many developers pointed out that most apps only ran smoothly on up to four cores, which was often used as an excuse for Intel to stick with quad-core designs during their period of stagnation. Ryzen provided the boost needed to deliver better speed and value. Yet this isn't entirely incorrect. While things are evolving, most games and consumer programs are built to handle only four cores. Numerous benchmarks reflect this limitation, since otherwise the outcomes would not reflect real-world scenarios. This situation likely stems from Intel's i3 and i5 chips offering just four threads, and many laptops including some i7 models having minimal threading options, giving programmers little motivation to push beyond that limit. It's a classic chicken-and-egg scenario, partly contributing to Intel's challenges.