AMD A6-9400 vs Intel Core i7-5550U Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data presents a remarkably consistent picture: the Intel Core i7-5550U wins every single head-to-head comparison against the AMD A6-9400. Across all five Cinebench tests, the Intel part maintains a narrow but uniform advantage. The largest margin appears in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the i7-5550U scores 238 against the A6-9400's 232, a 2.6% lead. The R20 multi-core test shows a similar story, with Intel at 992 and AMD at 969, a 2.4% difference. Single-core results follow the same pattern: R20 single-core gives Intel 139 versus AMD's 136, a 2.2% edge, while R23 single-core shows 333 against 326, a 2.1% gap. The R23 multi-core test rounds out the sweep at 2363 versus 2309, a 2.3% margin.

What is striking about these numbers is not the size of the wins, but their uniformity. The deltas cluster tightly between 2.1% and 2.6%, suggesting that the performance difference is structural rather than workload-specific. This is not a case where one chip excels in multi-threaded tasks while the other dominates single-threaded work. Instead, the Intel processor holds a steady, predictable lead across every rendering scenario. The average benchmark score reinforces this: the i7-5550U averages 813 across all recorded tests, while the A6-9400 averages 794. That translates to a roughly 2.4% overall advantage, squarely in line with the individual test deltas.

The percentile rankings place both processors in the lower tier of all CPUs tested. The Intel chip sits at the 22nd percentile, while the AMD part sits at the 21st. The difference is marginal, but it does align with the head-to-head results. When placed against their nearest rivals, both processors occupy similar performance territory. The i7-5550U matches the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 exactly at an average score of 813, and trails the Intel Xeon X3440 by just 0.2% (815 versus 813). The A6-9400 sits at 794, matching the AMD A10-5800B within 0.1%, and trails the AMD A10-7850K by 0.3% (796 versus 794). These rival comparisons show that both CPUs are clustered in a narrow band of performance, making the consistent Intel edge all the more notable. The data does not suggest a dramatic upset or a hidden weakness; it simply shows that across every measured metric, the Intel Core i7-5550U comes out ahead, even if the margins are modest.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies, and the underlying architecture explains much of the benchmark behavior. The Intel Core i7-5550U uses the Broadwell architecture, specifically the Broadwell-U codename, built on a 14 nm process node at Intel's foundry. It packs 1,900 million transistors into a die size of 133 mm². The AMD A6-9400, by contrast, uses the Excavator architecture under the Bristol Ridge codename, manufactured on a 28 nm node by GlobalFoundries. That chip carries 3,100 million transistors across a substantially larger 250 mm² die. The process node difference is significant: Intel's 14 nm process allows for a much denser, more power-efficient design, while AMD's 28 nm process requires more silicon area and likely more power to achieve comparable results.

The core configurations also differ in important ways. The Intel part has 2 cores and 4 threads, benefiting from Hyper-Threading technology. The AMD part has 2 cores and 2 threads, meaning it lacks simultaneous multi-threading. This partially explains why the Intel chip wins even in multi-core workloads: it can process four threads across two physical cores, while AMD is limited to two threads. The cache hierarchies reflect these design choices. Intel provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core, plus a shared 4 MB L3 cache. AMD offers 160 KB of L1 total and 1 MB of shared L2, with no L3 cache at all. The lack of an L3 cache is a notable architectural gap, as the Intel chip can rely on a larger, shared pool of fast memory for frequently accessed data.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The AMD A6-9400 has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.70 GHz, substantially higher than the Intel chip's 2.00 GHz base and 3.00 GHz boost. Despite this clock advantage, AMD still loses every benchmark. This suggests that Intel's architectural efficiency, combined with its smaller process node and larger cache hierarchy, more than compensates for the raw clock speed deficit. The memory interfaces also differ: Intel supports DDR3 with dual-channel access and a bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s, while AMD supports DDR4 with dual-channel access and a higher bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. Again, AMD has the nominal advantage here, but the benchmark results do not reflect it. The PCIe capabilities differ as well, with Intel offering Gen 2 with 12 lanes (CPU only) and AMD offering Gen 3 with 8 lanes (CPU only). AMD's newer PCIe standard provides higher per-lane bandwidth, but Intel has more lanes available for device connectivity.

The integrated graphics also diverge. Intel pairs the CPU with Intel HD 6000, while AMD includes Radeon R5. Both are integrated solutions, but the benchmark data in this comparison focuses exclusively on CPU rendering performance, so graphics capabilities are not directly measured here. The production statuses differ too: the Intel part is marked as end-of-life, while the AMD part is still active. The release dates reinforce this, with Intel launching in 2015 and AMD in 2019. The AMD chip is a newer product, built on an older architecture node, while the Intel chip is older but manufactured on a more advanced process.

Where Each One Wins

Given the sweep of benchmark wins, the Intel Core i7-5550U is the clear choice for any workload that relies on Cinebench-style multi-threaded rendering. The data shows a consistent 2.1% to 2.6% advantage across all tests, which means users running CPU-intensive rendering tasks will see slightly faster completion times with the Intel part. The presence of 4 threads versus 2 threads gives Intel an inherent advantage in any workload that can utilize more than two threads, even if the physical core count is identical. For single-threaded tasks, the Intel chip also wins, though the margin is slightly smaller at 2.1% to 2.2%. This makes Intel the better option for general productivity, everyday computing, and any application that is not heavily multi-threaded.

The AMD A6-9400 does not win any recorded benchmark, but that does not mean it lacks a use case. The data shows it has a higher base clock (3.40 GHz versus 2.00 GHz) and a higher boost clock (3.70 GHz versus 3.00 GHz). In theory, this should make it competitive in latency-sensitive or clock-bound workloads, but the benchmark results do not confirm this. The AMD part also supports newer DDR4 memory with higher bandwidth (38.4 GB/s versus 29.9 GB/s) and a newer PCIe Gen 3 interface, which could matter for system-level performance in tasks that are not purely CPU-bound. The AMD chip is also still in active production, meaning it remains available for new system builds, while the Intel part is end-of-life. For someone assembling a new desktop system on the AMD Socket AM4 platform, the A6-9400 offers a low-cost entry point that is still in production. The Intel chip, by contrast, uses the Intel BGA 1168 socket, which is a mobile form factor, suggesting it was designed for laptops rather than desktop builds.

In practical terms, the Intel part wins on pure CPU performance as measured by the database. The AMD part wins on platform modernity, with DDR4 support, PCIe Gen 3, and active production status. The benchmark data cannot speak to graphics performance, power consumption, or system-level features, but within the recorded metrics, Intel holds every advantage. The 65 W TDP of the AMD part versus the 15 W TDP of the Intel part is a notable difference, but the database does not include thermal or power efficiency benchmarks. The Intel part's much lower TDP suggests it would be far more efficient in a mobile or compact system, while the AMD part's higher TDP indicates it is designed for desktop use with more thermal headroom.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field. The Intel Core i7-5550U has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the AMD A6-9400 has 2 cores and 2 threads. Base clocks are 2000.00 MHz for Intel and 3400.00 MHz for AMD. Boost clocks are 3000.00 MHz and 3700.00 MHz respectively. The TDP is 15 W for Intel and 65 W for AMD. The sockets are entirely different: Intel BGA 1168 versus AMD Socket AM4. The architectures are Broadwell versus Excavator, with codenames Broadwell-U and Bristol Ridge. The process nodes are 14 nm for Intel and 28 nm for AMD. Transistor counts are 1,900 million and 3,100 million. Die sizes are 133 mm² and 250 mm². Cache layouts differ: Intel has 64 KB L1 per core and 256 KB L2 per core, plus 4 MB shared L3; AMD has 160 KB L1 total and 1 MB shared L2, with no L3 cache. Memory support is DDR3 for Intel and DDR4 for AMD, with bandwidths of 29.9 GB/s and 38.4 GB/s. PCIe is Gen 2 with 12 lanes for Intel and Gen 3 with 8 lanes for AMD. Integrated graphics are Intel HD 6000 versus Radeon R5. Market segments are Mobile and Desktop. Production statuses are End-of-life and Active. The release dates are 2015-02-28 and 2019-03-15. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $426, while the AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The part numbers are SR26A for Intel and AD9400AGABBOX for AMD. Both use dual-channel memory buses, and neither supports ECC memory.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core rendering?

A: The Intel Core i7-5550U wins all multi-core tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 238 versus AMD's 232, and in R20 multi-core it scores 992 versus 969. The R23 multi-core test shows 2363 versus 2309.

Q: Is the AMD A6-9400 competitive in single-core performance?

A: No, the AMD part loses every single-core test as well. The R20 single-core result is 139 for Intel and 136 for AMD, while the R23 single-core result is 333 for Intel and 326 for AMD.

Q: Why does the AMD processor have higher clock speeds but still lose?

A: The AMD A6-9400 has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.70 GHz, compared to Intel's 2.00 GHz base and 3.00 GHz boost. However, the Intel chip uses a 14 nm process with 4 MB of L3 cache and 4 threads, while AMD uses a 28 nm process with no L3 cache and only 2 threads. Architectural efficiency appears to outweigh raw clock speed in the recorded benchmarks.

Q: What are the memory differences between the two?

A: The Intel Core i7-5550U supports DDR3 with dual-channel access and 29.9 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD A6-9400 supports DDR4 with dual-channel access and 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. AMD has the higher nominal bandwidth.

Q: Which processor is still in production?

A: The AMD A6-9400 is marked as Active in production status and was released in 2019. The Intel Core i7-5550U is marked as End-of-life and was released in 2015.

Q: How do the two compare in overall benchmark averages?

A: The Intel Core i7-5550U has an average benchmark score of 813, while the AMD A6-9400 averages 794. The Intel chip also ranks at the 22nd percentile of all CPUs, versus the 21st percentile for AMD.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i7-5550U outperforms the AMD A6-9400 in every recorded benchmark. The margins are consistent, ranging from 2.1% to 2.6%, and the average score difference is 19 points (813 versus 794). For anyone prioritizing raw CPU rendering performance as measured by Cinebench, the Intel part is the superior choice. This holds true even though the AMD chip has higher clock speeds, newer memory support, and a later release date. The Intel chip's 14 nm process, 4 MB L3 cache, and 4 threads provide a structural advantage that clock speed alone cannot overcome.

The AMD A6-9400 does have its own rationale. It is still in active production, making it available for new desktop builds on the AM4 platform. It supports DDR4 memory with higher bandwidth (38.4 GB/s versus 29.9 GB/s) and PCIe Gen 3, which are more modern system interfaces. Its 65 W TDP suggests it is designed for desktop use with adequate cooling, while the Intel part's 15 W TDP points toward mobile or low-power applications. However, none of these advantages translate into benchmark wins in the recorded data. The Intel part's launch MSRP was $426, but the AMD part has no recorded launch price, so a direct cost comparison is not possible from the data.

For a user building a new desktop system today, the AMD A6-9400 offers an actively produced option on a current socket. For a user who already has a compatible Intel BGA 1168 platform or values the lower power envelope, the Core i7-5550U delivers better measured performance. The benchmark results favor Intel across the board, and the percentile rankings confirm that both chips sit near the bottom of the overall performance distribution. Neither processor is a high-performance part by modern standards, but within this comparison, the Intel Core i7-5550U is consistently the faster CPU. The data shows no scenario where the AMD part takes a win, so the verdict is straightforward: pick Intel for performance, pick AMD for platform currency and production availability, but understand that the measured computing performance belongs to Intel.