Intel Core i3-12300 Performance: DDR5 vs DDR4

Intel’s 12th generation processors from the top of the stack, including the flagship Core i9-12900K) and the more affordable and entry-level offerings such as the Core i3-12300, allow users to build a new system with the latest technologies available. One of the main elements that make Intel’s Alder Lake processors flexible for users building a new system is that it includes support for both DDR5 and DDR4 memory. It’s no secret that DDR5 memory costs (far) more than the already established DDR4 counterparts. One element to this includes an early adopter’s fee. Having the latest and greatest technology comes at a price premium.

The reason why we have opted to test the difference in performance between DDR5 and DDR4 memory with the Core i3-12300 is simply down to the price point. While users will most likely be looking to use DDR5 with the performance SKUs such as the Core i9-12900K, Core i7-12700K, and Core i5-12600K, users building a new system with the Core i3-12300 are more likely to go down a more affordable route. This includes using DDR4 memory, which is inherently cheaper than DDR5 and opting for a cheaper motherboard such as an H670, B660, or H610 option. Such systems do give up some performance versus what the i3-12300 can do at its peak, but in return it can bring costs down signfiicantly.

Traditionally we test our memory settings at JEDEC specifications. JEDEC is the standards body that determines the requirements for each memory standard. In the case of Intel's Alder Lake, the Core i3 supports both DDR5 and DDR4 memory. Below are the memory settings we used for our DDR5 versus DDR4 testing:

  • DDR4-3200 CL22
  • DDR5-4800(B) CL40

CPU Performance: DDR5 versus DDR4

(1-2) AppTimer: GIMP 2.10.18 (DDR5 vs DDR4)

(2-1) 3D Particle Movement v2.1 (non-AVX) (DDR5 vs DDR4)

(2-2) 3D Particle Movement v2.1 (Peak AVX) (DDR5 vs DDR4)

(2-5) NAMD ApoA1 Simulation (DDR5 vs DDR4)

(4-1) Blender 2.83 Custom Render Test (DDR5 vs DDR4)

(4-2) Corona 1.3 Benchmark (DDR5 vs DDR4)

(4-4) POV-Ray 3.7.1 (DDR5 vs DDR4)

(4-6a) CineBench R20 Single Thread (DDR5 vs DDR4)

(4-6b) CineBench R20 Multi-Thread (DDR5 vs DDR4)

(4-7a) CineBench R23 Single Thread (DDR5 vs DDR4)

(4-7b) CineBench R23 Multi-Thread (DDR5 vs DDR4)

(5-1a) Handbrake 1.3.2, 1080p30 H264 to 480p Discord (DDR5 vs DDR4)

(5-1b) Handbrake 1.3.2, 1080p30 H264 to 720p YouTube (DDR5 vs DDR4)

(5-1c) Handbrake 1.3.2, 1080p30 H264 to 4K60 HEVC (DDR5 vs DDR4)

(5-4) WinRAR 5.90 Test, 3477 files, 1.96 GB (DDR5 vs DDR4)

(8-1c) Geekbench 5 Single Thread (DDR5 vs DDR4)

(8-1d) Geekbench 5 Multi-Thread (DDR5 vs DDR4)

In our computational benchmarks, there wasn't much difference between DDR5-4800 CL40 and DDR4-3200 CL22 when using the Core i3-12300. The biggest difference came in our WinRAR benchmark which is heavily reliant on memory to increase performance; the DDR5 performed around 21% better than DDR4 in this scenario.

Gaming Performance: DDR5 versus DDR4

(b-7) Civilization VI - 1080p Max - Average FPS

(b-8) Civilization VI - 1080p Max - 95th Percentile

(b-5) Civilization VI - 4K Min - Average FPS (copy)

(b-6) Civilization VI - 4K Min - 95th Percentile (copy)

(g-7) Borderlands 3 - 1080p Max - Average FPS (copy)

(g-8) Borderlands 3 - 1080p Max - 95th Percentile (copy)

(g-5) Borderlands 3 - 4K VLow - Average FPS (copy)

(g-6) Borderlands 3 - 4K VLow - 95th Percentile (copy)

(i-7) Far Cry 5 - 1080p Ultra - Average FPS (copy)

(i-8) Far Cry 5 - 1080p Ultra - 95th Percentile (copy)

(i-5) Far Cry 5 - 4K Low - Average FPS (copy)

(i-6) Far Cry 5 - 4K Low - 95th Percentile (copy)

On the whole, DDR5 does perform better in our gaming tests, but not enough to make it a 'must have' in comparison to DDR4 memory. The gains overall are marginal for the most part, with DDR5 offering around 3-7 more frames per second over DDR4 memory, depending on the titles game engine optimization.

LGA1700: Reports of Bending Sockets CPU Benchmark Performance: Power, Office, And Science
Comments Locked

140 Comments

View All Comments

  • skydiverian - Saturday, March 5, 2022 - link

    It's been 2 months since non-K Alder Lake CPUs launched (including all quad core SKUs) and they are definitely available in the UK from reputable independent retailers that specialise in computer equipment. The 12100 is available & in stock for £135 - around £30 more than the 10100 and £5 less than the 10300. Not great prices but from experience fairly typical for the market, at least in the UK.

    The US isn't great though the usual suspects do have some options. Considering that everyone seems to have the 12xxxK SKUs in stock it will likely be easy to get whatever you want in a month or 2.
  • bwj - Thursday, March 3, 2022 - link

    The fact that your i3 beats your i5 in Speedometer 2 implies a problem with the platform. Windows should be keeping a user-interactive process on the P cores all the time, but it seems from these results that Chrome's threads are wandering between P and E cores. There's really no other explanation for why the i5-12600K with 11% higher clocks gets a lower score.

    Personally I find the E cores more of a hazard than a benefit, and I have them disabled.
  • brantron - Thursday, March 3, 2022 - link

    The scores are all too low. Prior reviews used Chrome 92, which is missing a significant V8 update for Windows.

    Mobile CPUs also exhibit this behavior, due to more hardware managed power states. It is a royal PITA to find the secret handshake that maintains their litany of peak clocks per CPU core, ring bus, memory controller, RAM, etc.

    My Tiger Lake i5 goes from 160 to 200 in Speedometer by adding "processor energy performance preference policy" to the Windows power advanced power settings menu. Reducing it to 0% raises the minimum clock speed to about 3 GHz.

    Alder Lake CPUs with E cores introduce another variable with the hardware thread scheduler. There is also a larger ring bus on the i5 12600K, which increases latency.
  • bwj - Thursday, March 3, 2022 - link

    Yes the scores are extremely low. With current Chrome/Linux on an i7-12700K with the E-cores disabled I get 305.

    Considering that the browser is a compiler for Javascript it doesn't make a lot of sense to freeze its version. It would be nice if we could get a rolling picture, based on a few key reference systems, of what a buyer *today* would experience with *today's* software.
  • Makaveli - Thursday, March 3, 2022 - link

    Those Speedometer scores have always been off. Take look at the thread in the forum with user posted scores.

    https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/how-fast-is-y...
  • kpb321 - Thursday, March 3, 2022 - link

    Anyone else find the DDR4 vs DDR5 graphs annoying? I realize they are sorted by performance but with only 2 entries in each one I think it would make a lot more sense to just have a consistent order.
  • CiccioB - Friday, March 4, 2022 - link

    That would just introduce the problem that you must check if a lower bar is better than a longer one, or viceversa.
    Ordering it by performance allows to easily see which is faster and by what amount.
  • Mike Bruzzone - Thursday, March 3, 2022 - link

    Beyond industrial embedded for control plane / processing [including coprocessing acceleration point of sale for example], I'm not sure why quads remain a subject of interest there are sooo many recent back generation options why even produce them today for mass market? Ryzen quads failing out of sort are relied in 1x8ccx+1x4ccx for dodadeca so they're still utilized but a standalone 4C/8t [?] there are so many good used options and hexa used [Coffee Lake] is gaining volume in the secondary market on system upgrade on hexa reclaim.

    All Alder i3 12300 available in the WW channel today equals 0.00047% of full line available. The top three AL SKUs are 12900K at 40.8%, 700K at 46.7% now at 87.6% of full line and number 3 SKU volume wise is 12400 at 2.5% and at number 4 is 12600K/Kf at 2.4% combined.

    On finished component yield and silicon performance all Alder Lake are essentially 900K/700K that is similar to Coffee Refresh octa before disablement most 9th gen started out as 9900_.

    On the AMD side you can purchase a used 2600 hexa for less than $100 and on WW channel availability that is for both used and new there are x126 more R5 2600 than i3 12300. Pursuant
    AMD quads 5300G has currently x37 more channel available and R3 3300X x25.

    Mike Bruzzone, Camp Marketing
  • Wereweeb - Thursday, March 3, 2022 - link

    1) Speak english please

    2) An Alder Lake quad-core is equal or better than a Ryzen 5 2600. All benchmarks also show substantial improvements in 1% lows. What matters most is overall performance, not simply the number of cores.

    3) The vast majority of people are just fine running a modern quad-core.
  • Wereweeb - Thursday, March 3, 2022 - link

    And yes, by "vast majority of people" I mean people, not "hurr durr 360hz monitor" g*mers.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now