AMD Athlon PRO 300U vs Intel Core i5-2400 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear, consistent narrative: the AMD Athlon PRO 300U wins every head-to-head comparison in this dataset, though the margins are not dramatic. Across five Cinebench tests, the Athlon PRO 300U outperforms the Intel Core i5-2400 in every instance, with deltas ranging from 5.7% to 6.1%. This uniformity is remarkable—the AMD part does not merely edge ahead in a single workload; it establishes a steady advantage across both multi-core and single-core rendering tasks.

Starting with multi-core performance, the Cinebench R15 multicore test shows the Athlon PRO 300U scoring 349 against the i5-2400’s 329, a 6.1% lead. The pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multicore, where the AMD chip posts 1456 versus 1374, a 6% advantage. In the heavier Cinebench R23 multicore workload, the scores are 3468 and 3272 respectively, again a 6% gap. These results are noteworthy because the i5-2400 has twice the physical core count—4 cores versus the Athlon’s 2—yet the AMD processor still manages to outpace it in threaded workloads. The data suggests that architectural efficiency and simultaneous multithreading (4 threads on 2 cores) compensate for the core-count deficit.

Single-core performance tells a similar story. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Athlon PRO 300U scores 205 against the i5-2400’s 194, a 5.7% margin. The Cinebench R23 single-core test shows 489 versus 462, a 5.8% lead. These results are particularly telling given the i5-2400’s higher base clock (3.10 GHz versus 2.40 GHz) and slightly higher boost clock (3.40 GHz versus 3.30 GHz). Despite the Intel part’s clock advantage, the newer AMD architecture delivers better per-clock performance.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this picture. The Athlon PRO 300U holds an average benchmark score of 1193, while the i5-2400 trails at 1187—a difference of just 6 points, or roughly 0.5%. This narrow average gap, combined with the larger deltas in individual Cinebench tests, indicates that the AMD part’s wins are consistent but not overwhelming. Both processors sit at the 33rd percentile among all CPUs, placing them in the same performance tier despite their generational and architectural differences.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Athlon PRO 300U wins across every benchmark category present in this dataset, but the nature of those wins varies by workload type. In multi-core rendering, the Athlon’s victory reflects its thread efficiency. With only 2 physical cores but 4 threads, it leverages simultaneous multithreading effectively, delivering a 6% advantage in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests. This suggests that for workloads that scale with thread count—such as video encoding, 3D rendering, or batch processing—the Athlon PRO 300U is the stronger choice, despite its lower core count.

In single-core tasks, the Athlon PRO 300U also leads, with margins of 5.7% and 5.8% in Cinebench R20 and R23 respectively. This advantage is significant for applications that rely on single-threaded performance, such as older games, spreadsheet calculations, or general desktop responsiveness. The data indicates that the Athlon’s newer Zen architecture provides a meaningful IPC (instructions per clock) uplift over the Sandy Bridge design in the i5-2400, enough to overcome the Intel part’s higher clock speeds.

The Intel Core i5-2400, by contrast, does not win a single benchmark in this comparison. Its 0 wins out of 5 head-to-head tests place it firmly behind the Athlon PRO 300U across the board. However, it is importantly the i5-2400’s multi-core scores are closer than one might expect given its 95W TDP and 4 physical cores. In Cinebench R23 multicore, for instance, the gap is only 196 points (3468 versus 3272). The i5-2400’s 6 MB of shared L3 cache, compared to the Athlon’s 4 MB, may help it remain competitive in memory-intensive workloads, though the benchmark data does not directly isolate cache effects.

For users prioritizing raw multi-threaded throughput, the Athlon PRO 300U is the clear winner in this comparison. For those considering platform longevity or upgrade paths, the i5-2400’s desktop socket (Intel Socket 1155) offers a different ecosystem than the Athlon’s mobile FP5 socket, but the benchmark data does not quantify those ecosystem differences.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Athlon PRO 300U has an average benchmark score of 1193, while the Intel Core i5-2400 scores 1187. This represents a difference of 6 points, or approximately 0.5%, placing both processors at the 33rd percentile among all CPUs.

Q: How does the Athlon PRO 300U achieve a multi-core win despite having fewer cores?

A: The Athlon PRO 300U has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the i5-2400 has 4 cores and 4 threads. The Athlon’s simultaneous multithreading, combined with its newer Zen architecture, allows it to deliver a 6% advantage in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests, as the data shows scores of 349, 1456, and 3468 respectively versus the i5-2400’s 329, 1374, and 3272.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two processors?

A: The largest margin is 6.1%, recorded in the Cinebench R15 multi-core test, where the Athlon PRO 300U scores 349 against the i5-2400’s 329. The remaining multi-core tests show a 6% gap, while single-core tests show margins of 5.7% and 5.8%.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-2400 win any benchmark in this comparison?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the Athlon PRO 300U winning all 5 benchmark comparisons. The i5-2400’s best results are its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 3272 and single-core score of 462, both of which trail the Athlon’s corresponding scores of 3468 and 489.

Q: How do the single-core performance differences compare to multi-core differences?

A: The single-core deltas are slightly smaller but still consistent. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Athlon leads by 5.7% (205 versus 194), and in R23 single-core, by 5.8% (489 versus 462). Multi-core deltas are 6% to 6.1%, making the multi-core advantage marginally larger.

Q: Are these processors comparable in overall performance tier?

A: Yes. Both processors sit at the 33rd percentile among all CPUs, and their average benchmark scores differ by only 6 points (1193 versus 1187). Their nearest rivals also overlap—both are within 0.5% of the Intel Core i3-4170 and Intel Core i7-8665UE, which have average scores of 1193.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ substantially in their specifications, reflecting their different eras and market segments. The AMD Athlon PRO 300U is a mobile processor with a 15W TDP, while the Intel Core i5-2400 is a desktop part with a 95W TDP—a 6.3x difference in thermal design power. The Athlon uses AMD Socket FP5, whereas the i5-2400 uses Intel Socket 1155.

Clock speeds favor the Intel part on paper: the i5-2400 has a base clock of 3.10 GHz and a boost clock of 3.40 GHz, while the Athlon PRO 300U has a 2.40 GHz base and 3.30 GHz boost. Core and thread counts also differ: the Athlon has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the i5-2400 has 4 cores and 4 threads (no hyper-threading). The Athlon is based on a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, while the i5-2400 uses Intel’s 32 nm process.

Memory support differs by generation: the Athlon supports DDR4 memory, while the i5-2400 supports DDR3. Both use dual-channel memory buses. Cache configurations diverge as well: the Athlon has 128 KB L1 and 512 KB L2 per core, plus 4 MB shared L3, while the i5-2400 has 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, plus 6 MB shared L3. The integrated graphics differ—Radeon Vega 3 on the AMD side versus Intel HD 2000 on the Intel side. The i5-2400 includes PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Athlon’s PCIe specification is not listed. The i5-2400 has a part number of SR00Q, while the Athlon’s is not listed. Production status also differs: the Athlon is active, while the i5-2400 is end-of-life. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, and both lack ECC memory support.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these processors is generational and philosophical. The AMD Athlon PRO 300U is built on the Zen architecture (codename Raven Ridge 2), representing a modern, efficiency-focused design. It uses a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries and is classified under the Athlon generation. The Intel Core i5-2400 uses the Sandy Bridge architecture (codename Sandy Bridge), a 32 nm design from Intel, and belongs to the Core i5 generation.

The transistor and die size data starkly illustrate the process node evolution. The i5-2400 contains 1,160 million transistors on a 216 mm² die—figures that were competitive for its 2011 release. The Athlon PRO 300U’s transistor count and die size are not listed, but its 14 nm process represents a significant lithographic shrink compared to the 32 nm node. This process advantage contributes to the Athlon’s dramatically lower TDP (15W versus 95W) while still delivering superior benchmark scores.

Cache architecture differs notably. The Athlon uses a larger per-core L1 (128 KB versus 64 KB) and L2 (512 KB versus 256 KB) but a smaller shared L3 (4 MB versus 6 MB). This suggests the AMD design prioritizes fast access to local data, while the Intel design relies more heavily on shared cache for cross-core communication. The smaller L3 on the Athlon does not appear to hinder its performance, as benchmark results show it leading in all tested workloads.

Integrated graphics represent another architectural divergence. The Athlon PRO 300U features Radeon Vega 3 graphics, while the i5-2400 uses Intel HD 2000. The benchmark data does not include graphics tests, so performance comparisons are limited to CPU workloads. However, the presence of newer integrated graphics on the AMD part is a qualitative advantage for systems without discrete GPUs.

The memory controllers align with their respective platforms: the Athlon supports DDR4, while the i5-2400 supports DDR3. Both use dual-channel configurations, but DDR4 offers higher potential bandwidth and efficiency than DDR3. The benchmark data does not quantify memory bandwidth, but the architectural support for newer memory standards is a differentiating factor. The i5-2400’s PCIe Gen 3 support with 16 lanes is a spec-sheet advantage for desktop expansion, though the Athlon’s PCIe capabilities are not listed. Overall, the data positions the Athlon PRO 300U as the more efficient, modern architecture that outperforms the older Sandy Bridge design despite its lower core count and clock speeds.