AMD FX-9800P vs Intel Core i5-4250U Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark record for these two mobile processors is split sharply by workload type. In the Cinebench suite, the AMD FX-9800P holds a consistent advantage across every multicore and single-core test. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the FX-9800P scores 210 against the Core i5-4250U's 182, a 13.3% lead. That margin repeats almost exactly in Cinebench R20 multicore, where 876 versus 760 represents a 13.2% edge. The same pattern appears in Cinebench R23 multicore: 2088 for AMD versus 1811 for Intel, again 13.3% ahead. Single-core Cinebench results tell the same story, with the FX-9800P winning R20 single-core 123 to 107 (13% faster) and R23 single-core 294 to 255 (13.3% faster).

The Geekbench tests flip the outcome decisively in Intel's favor. In Geekbench multicore, the Core i5-4250U scores 1434 while the FX-9800P manages only 1127, giving Intel a 27.2% lead. The single-core Geekbench gap is even larger: 742 versus 498, a 49% advantage for the Intel part. These two benchmark families clearly stress different aspects of the processors, and the results suggest Intel's architecture wins in Geekbench's workload mix while AMD's higher clock speeds carry Cinebench.

Overall, the FX-9800P wins 5 of the 7 head-to-head tests, with the Core i5-4250U taking 2. Both chips sit at the 20th percentile in the database's ranking of all CPUs, and their average benchmark scores are close: 756 for Intel versus 745 for AMD. The nearest rival data reinforces that both parts occupy the same performance tier. The Intel chip trades blows with the Core i5-3230M (0.2% apart) and Core i5-3210M (0.2% apart), while the AMD chip sits near the A10 PRO-7800B (0.1% apart) and Core i5-4200U (0.1% apart). The takeaway is that neither processor is a class leader, but the choice between them depends heavily on which benchmark suite you trust.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The AMD FX-9800P scores 2088, which is 13.3% higher than the Intel Core i5-4250U's 1811.

Q: Why does the Intel chip win Geekbench by such a large margin?

A: In Geekbench multicore, the Core i5-4250U scores 1434 versus 1127 for the FX-9800P, a 27.2% lead. In single-core Geekbench, the Intel part scores 742 versus 498, a 49% advantage. The database records show Intel's architecture handles Geekbench's workload far better.

Q: Do both processors have the same TDP?

A: Yes, both are rated at 15 watts, making them comparable for thin-and-light mobile designs.

Q: What is the core and thread count difference?

A: The Intel Core i5-4250U has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the AMD FX-9800P has 4 cores and 4 threads. AMD's chip has more physical cores but no simultaneous multithreading.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD FX-9800P boosts to 3.60 GHz, while the Intel Core i5-4250U boosts to 2.60 GHz. That 1 GHz gap in boost frequency helps explain AMD's Cinebench advantage.

Q: Are these processors still in production?

A: The AMD FX-9800P is marked as end-of-life. The database does not list a production status for the Intel Core i5-4250U.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from fundamentally different design philosophies. Intel's Core i5-4250U uses the Haswell architecture on a 22 nm process, built by Intel's own foundry. It packs 1,400 million transistors into an 118 mm² die. The AMD FX-9800P uses the Excavator architecture on a 28 nm process from GlobalFoundries, with a much larger 250 mm² die and 3,100 million transistors. That transistor count is more than double Intel's, but the larger process node and die size reflect an older, less dense design.

Cache hierarchies diverge sharply. Intel's chip provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 3 MB of shared L3 cache. AMD's FX-9800P has 320 KB of L1 total and 1 MB of L2 per module, with no L3 cache at all. The absence of L3 on the AMD part is notable, though the larger L2 allocation per module partially compensates. Intel's shared L3 can serve as a larger pool for frequently accessed data, which may contribute to its Geekbench strength.

Memory support differs as well. The Intel chip supports DDR3 memory, while the AMD chip supports DDR4 with dual-channel operation and a recorded memory bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s. Intel's memory bus width is not listed in the database. The AMD part also exposes PCIe Gen 3 with 8 lanes from the CPU, while Intel's PCIe configuration is not recorded.

Integrated graphics are another differentiator. Intel bundles HD 5000 graphics, while AMD includes Radeon R7 with 8 compute units. Neither GPU is benchmarked in the head-to-head data, so performance comparisons there are not possible from the recorded measurements. The FX-9800P's Bristol Ridge codename and AMD Socket FP4 package contrast with Intel's Haswell codename and BGA 1168 socket, meaning the two are not interchangeable in any system.

Specification Differences

The core specifications that differ between these two processors are straightforward. The Intel Core i5-4250U has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the AMD FX-9800P has 4 cores and 4 threads. Base clocks differ substantially: Intel runs at 1300 MHz, AMD at 2.70 GHz. Boost clocks also favor AMD, with 2.60 GHz versus 3.60 GHz. Both are rated at 15 W TDP, so power envelopes match.

The process node and foundry differ: Intel uses 22 nm at Intel, AMD uses 28 nm at GlobalFoundries. Transistor counts and die sizes are recorded at 1,400 million and 118 mm² for Intel versus 3,100 million and 250 mm² for AMD. Cache layouts are not directly comparable because Intel lists per-core L1 and L2 plus shared L3, while AMD lists total L1 and per-module L2 with no L3. Memory support is DDR3 for Intel and DDR4 for AMD, with AMD also recording dual-channel operation and 29.9 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD chip has a documented PCIe Gen 3, 8-lane configuration; Intel's is not listed.

Sockets differ: Intel BGA 1168 versus AMD Socket FP4. Release dates are about three years apart, with Intel launching on June 3, 2013, and AMD on May 30, 2016. The AMD part is marked end-of-life, and its part number is FM980PADY44AB, while Intel's is SR16M. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, and neither supports ECC memory.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FX-9800P wins in every Cinebench test recorded, which suggests it handles rendering and other heavily threaded compute workloads better. The 13.3% multicore lead in Cinebench R23 and the consistent 13% to 13.3% margins across all Cinebench tests indicate a steady advantage in that benchmark family. The FX-9800P's higher base and boost clocks, 2.70 GHz and 3.60 GHz respectively, likely drive this result, along with its four physical cores. For users running Cinebench-style workloads, the AMD part is the better pick from the data.

The Intel Core i5-4250U wins decisively in Geekbench, both multicore and single-core. The 27.2% multicore lead and 49% single-core lead are far larger than AMD's Cinebench margins. Geekbench's mixed workload of integer, floating-point, and memory tests clearly favors Intel's Haswell architecture. The Intel chip's shared 3 MB L3 cache and per-core L2 layout may provide lower latency for the types of operations Geekbench exercises. For general system responsiveness and applications that resemble Geekbench's test patterns, the Intel part appears stronger.

In the broader database context, both chips sit near each other in average score, with Intel at 756 and AMD at 745. The nearest rivals for Intel include the Core i5-3230M and Core i5-3210M, both within 0.2%, while AMD's nearest rivals include the A10 PRO-7800B and Core i5-4200U, also within 0.1% to 0.3%. This places both chips in the same performance class overall, with the choice depending on which benchmark family matters more for the intended use. The AMD chip wins more individual tests (5 versus 2), but the Intel chip wins by larger margins in its two victories.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split based on workload priorities. The AMD FX-9800P should be the choice for anyone whose primary concern is Cinebench-style rendering performance. It beats the Intel Core i5-4250U by 13.3% in Cinebench R23 multicore and by similar margins in every other Cinebench test, including single-core. Its four physical cores and higher clock speeds give it a consistent edge in that benchmark family, and it also wins 5 of the 7 recorded head-to-head tests overall.

The Intel Core i5-4250U should be the pick for general-purpose use that aligns with Geekbench's measurements. Its 49% single-core Geekbench lead and 27.2% multicore Geekbench lead are the largest margins recorded between these two chips. That suggests better per-core efficiency and memory behavior for everyday tasks, even though it loses the Cinebench suite. The Intel chip also has the architectural advantage of a shared L3 cache and a smaller 22 nm process node, which may translate to better power characteristics at the same 15 W TDP.

For a buyer deciding between these two in a used or budget mobile system, the database suggests matching the chip to the application. If the system will run rendering, video encoding, or other Cinebench-like workloads, the FX-9800P's higher scores make it the safer bet. If the system is for general productivity, web browsing, or office work where Geekbench patterns apply, the Core i5-4250U's large Geekbench wins should not be ignored. Neither chip is a standout in the overall CPU ranking, both at the 20th percentile, but the FX-9800P's broader win count in head-to-head tests gives it a slight edge in the raw record. The Intel part's two wins are decisive in their respective tests, so the final recommendation depends on which benchmark suite the user trusts.