CPU Comparison
Intel Core i5-8400 vs Intel Core 5 120
A side-by-side comparison of specs, performance and value. The Intel Core i5-8400 is a landmark mainstream desktop processor that fundamentally shifted the budget CPU market by bringing six physical cores to the i5 tier for the first time.
The Bottom Line
Overview & Launch
Specifications Compared
Performance Compared
Productivity
Handles office tasks and moderate programming workloads efficiently.
Handles typical office tasks and light creative workloads well; multi‑threaded exports benefit from six real cores and SMT, but larger caches and more cores on higher‑end parts reduce render times noticeably.
Gaming
Capable of smooth 1080p gaming when paired with a mid-range discrete GPU.
Provides playable frame rates at 1080p in most modern titles when paired with a mid‑range GPU; expect some CPU‑limited scenarios at 144 Hz in CPU‑heavy games, where CPUs with higher boost clocks or E‑cores can pull ahead.
Virtualization
Good for basic VMs, but 6 threads limit heavy parallel virtualization.
Efficiency
Balanced performance within a standard 65W power envelope.
The 65 W base power keeps idle and light‑load power modest; under multi‑threaded loads the 110 W MTP is reasonable for six cores, yielding acceptable performance per watt for this price segment.
Specialized Performance
AI / ML
- No AI-specific hardware
- CPU inference is slow due to lack of threads
- No discrete NPU; AI workloads run on CPU cores using AVX2/AVX and Intel DL Boost where applicable.
- Suitable for small inference tasks and local prototyping; not ideal for training or large models compared to NPUs or GPUs.
Content Creation
Gaming
- Excellent for budget gaming builds
- Handles eSports titles flawlessly
- May bottleneck high-end modern GPUs at 1080p
- Six P‑cores and 4.5 GHz max turbo are sufficient for most 1080p gaming workloads.
- Limited by lack of E‑cores in extremely parallel game engines compared to 10‑core Raptor Lake options.
- iGPU (UHD 730) is only suitable for very light or older games; discrete GPU is recommended for serious gaming.
Industry Impact
Best CPU by Use Case
Target Audience
Strengths & Weaknesses
Pros
- Disruptive price-to-performance ratio
- 6 physical cores for modern gaming
- Includes integrated UHD Graphics 630
- Standard 65W TDP is easy to cool
- Wide compatibility with 300-series motherboards
Cons
- No Hyper-Threading (only 6 threads)
- Locked multiplier prevents overclocking
- End-of-life platform (LGA 1151)
- Officially limited to DDR4-2666
- Not supported by Windows 11 officially
Pros
- Proven 6P+0E Alder Lake architecture with strong 1080p gaming and everyday performance.
- Dual DDR5/DDR4 support maximizes board compatibility across 600/700 series.
- PCIe 5.0 x16 GPU link and PCIe 4.0 x4 for NVMe on suitable motherboards.
- UHD 730 iGPU supports multiple displays and hardware decode/encode (H.264, HEVC, AV1 decode).
- 65 W base power keeps cooling requirements modest; stock RM1 cooler is usable for light workloads.
- At $211 RCP, pricing is competitive for a new six‑core part.
Cons
- No E‑cores; in highly threaded games or productivity tasks, 10‑core Raptor Lake‑Refresh SKUs can outperform it.
- Reuses Alder Lake silicon, so it lacks architectural improvements found in Raptor Lake or Arrow Lake.
- Locked multiplier limits enthusiast overclocking.
- The Core (Series 1) naming can confuse buyers who expect a newer microarchitecture.
- Intel’s 600/700 chipsets are mature; the platform has no upgrade path to LGA1851.
Competitors & Alternatives
Intel Core i5-8400
- AMD Ryzen 5 1600Rival
Mainstream Desktop
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i5-7500Rival
Mainstream Desktop
- AMD Ryzen 5 2600Rival
Mainstream Desktop
- Intel Core i7-7700Rival
Mainstream Desktop
- AMD Ryzen 5 2400GRival
Mainstream Desktop
Slightly newer generation with marginally higher clocks.
Compare head-to-headNewer platform with 8 threads and similar gaming performance.
Compare head-to-headLow power alternative for SFF builds.
Compare head-to-head
Intel Core 5 120
- AMD Ryzen 5 5600Rival
Mainstream Desktop
- AMD Ryzen 5 7600Rival
Mainstream Desktop
- Intel Core i5‑12400Rival
Mainstream Desktop
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i5‑14400Rival
Mainstream Desktop
- Intel Core 5 120FRival
Mainstream Desktop
- Used Intel Core i5‑12400Alt
Offers nearly identical performance at lower cost if you are comfortable with the used market.
Our Verdict on Each
A legendary value CPU that forced the market to adopt 6 cores as the standard. Excellent for budget gaming, though lacking Hyper-Threading.
Best for: Upgrading an older LGA 1151 system on a budget, or building an office/HTPC machine.
Read the full reviewThe Core 5 120 is essentially a rebadged, slightly retuned i5‑12400 with a 100 MHz higher turbo (4.5 GHz) and a 110 W MTP. For new builds on LGA1700, it offers sensible 1080p gaming and everyday performance at a competitive $211 RCP, though the identical-architecture predecessor and AMD’s AM4 six‑core options can be better value depending on pricing.
Best for: Budget gaming or general‑purpose build on an existing LGA1700 (600/700 series) board where you want a drop‑in six‑core upgrade with DDR5 support and don’t need more than 1080p gaming.
Read the full reviewFrequently Asked Questions
Which is better, Intel Core i5-8400 or Intel Core 5 120?
Based on our editorial ratings, the Intel Core i5-8400 comes out ahead with a score of 8.5/10. That said, the best choice depends on your workload — check the spec and performance breakdown above for gaming, productivity and efficiency differences.
Which is faster for gaming, Intel Core i5-8400 or Intel Core 5 120?
For gaming, the Intel Core i5-8400 leads with a gaming performance score of 78/100 among Intel Core i5-8400 and Intel Core 5 120.
Do Intel Core i5-8400 and Intel Core 5 120 use the same socket?
No. They use different sockets (Intel Core i5-8400: Intel Socket 1151, Intel Core 5 120: FCLGA1700 (LGA1700)), so each needs a compatible motherboard.
Which is faster in multi-core benchmarks?
The Intel Core 5 120 posts the highest multi-core benchmark score. Multi-core results: Intel Core 5 120 (18,700). Benchmark figures are approximate and workload-dependent.