AMD FX-9830P vs Intel Core i5-2405S Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FX-9830P has an average benchmark score of 1006, while the Intel Core i5-2405S scores 991. The AMD part also sits at the 27th percentile of all CPUs, matching the Intel part's 27th percentile.

Q: How do the two chips compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i5-2405S wins the Cinebench R23 multi-core test with a score of 2890, beating the AMD FX-9830P's 2806 by a margin of 2.9%.

Q: Which processor performs better in Geekbench multi-core?

A: The AMD FX-9830P takes the Geekbench multi-core test with a score of 1606, which is 12.7% ahead of the Intel Core i5-2405S's 1425.

Q: What are the memory support differences?

A: The AMD FX-9830P supports DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, while the Intel Core i5-2405S supports DDR3 memory with a dual-channel bus. The Intel chip's memory bandwidth is not recorded in the database.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. Both the AMD FX-9830P and the Intel Core i5-2405S are locked parts.

Q: What are the release dates for these two CPUs?

A: The AMD FX-9830P was released on 2016-05-30, while the Intel Core i5-2405S was released earlier on 2011-05-21. Both are end-of-life products.

Architecture Differences

The AMD FX-9830P and Intel Core i5-2405S come from fundamentally different design eras and philosophies. The AMD part uses the Excavator architecture built on Bristol Ridge, which is fabricated on a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 3,100 million transistors into a 250 mm² die. The Intel Core i5-2405S uses the Sandy Bridge architecture, built on a 32 nm process at Intel, with 1,160 million transistors on a 216 mm² die. The AMD chip integrates nearly three times the transistor count, though on a denser node.

Both parts have four cores and four threads, so there is no simultaneous multithreading advantage on either side. The cache layouts differ significantly. The AMD FX-9830P has 320 KB of L1 cache and 1 MB of L2 cache per module, with no L3 cache at all. The Intel part has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and a shared 6 MB L3 cache. The presence of a shared L3 on the Intel side is a structural advantage for workloads that repeatedly access a working set larger than the small L2 caches.

Memory support also separates the two. The AMD FX-9830P uses DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus and a recorded memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The Intel Core i5-2405S uses DDR3 memory with a dual-channel bus, and the database does not list its memory bandwidth. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP4, while the Intel part uses Intel Socket 1155. PCIe connectivity also differs: the AMD chip provides Gen 3 with 8 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel chip provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The AMD FX-9830P includes a Radeon R7 with 8 compute units, while the Intel Core i5-2405S includes Intel HD 3000. Neither part supports ECC memory. Both chips have locked multipliers, and both are end-of-life products. The AMD FX-9830P is classified as a mobile part, while the Intel Core i5-2405S is a desktop part. The AMD chip has a 35 W TDP, whereas the Intel chip has a 65 W TDP, a notable difference given the Intel part draws more power despite being an older design.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results split cleanly across two suites. The Intel Core i5-2405S wins all five Cinebench tests, while the AMD FX-9830P wins both Geekbench tests. The margins are relatively small in Cinebench but much larger in Geekbench.

Starting with Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Intel part scores 291 against the AMD part's 282, a 3.1% advantage. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the Intel lead is 1213 to 1178, a 2.9% gap. The single-core Cinebench R20 test shows the same 2.9% margin, with Intel scoring 171 versus AMD's 166. Cinebench R23 multi-core continues the pattern: Intel scores 2890, AMD scores 2806, again a 2.9% difference. Cinebench R23 single-core gives Intel 408 against AMD's 396, another 2.9% margin. Across all five Cinebench tests, the Intel processor holds a consistent, narrow lead of roughly 3%.

The Geekbench results reverse the picture decisively. In Geekbench multi-core, the AMD FX-9830P scores 1606 against the Intel part's 1425, a 12.7% advantage. In Geekbench single-core, AMD scores 605 versus Intel's 541, an 11.8% lead. These are large margins by comparison, more than four times the size of the Intel Cinebench advantage in percentage terms. The AMD chip wins two benchmarks, the Intel chip wins five, but the AMD wins carry considerably more weight in their respective tests.

Looking at the broader database position, the AMD FX-9830P's average score of 1006 places it exactly alongside the Intel Core i7-880 and Intel Core i5-10210Y, both also at 1006, and 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-2630QM. The Intel Core i5-2405S's average of 991 sits 0.2% behind the Intel Core i7-960, Intel Core i7-965, Intel Xeon W3565, and AMD Phenom II X6 1065T, all at 993. The two CPUs in this comparison are separated by only 15 points in average score, a 1.5% difference in favor of the AMD part.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification category. The AMD FX-9830P has a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 3.70 GHz, while the Intel Core i5-2405S has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 3.30 GHz. The AMD chip runs at higher clocks on both ends, which helps explain its Geekbench advantage.

The TDP difference is substantial: the AMD FX-9830P is rated at 35 W, while the Intel Core i5-2405S is rated at 65 W. The AMD part achieves its performance at nearly half the power envelope. The process nodes differ as well: AMD uses 28 nm, Intel uses 32 nm. Transistor counts are 3,100 million for AMD and 1,160 million for Intel, with die sizes of 250 mm² and 216 mm² respectively.

Cache configurations are not directly comparable due to different organizational schemes. The AMD FX-9830P has 320 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per module, with no L3. The Intel Core i5-2405S has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3. The Intel part has a clear L3 advantage, while the AMD part's L2 is organized per module.

Memory support differs by generation: DDR4 for AMD, DDR3 for Intel. The AMD part has a recorded memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s; the Intel part has no recorded bandwidth. PCIe lanes differ: 8 lanes for AMD, 16 lanes for Intel, both Gen 3. Sockets are incompatible: AMD Socket FP4 versus Intel Socket 1155. The integrated graphics are Radeon R7 8CU on AMD versus Intel HD 3000 on Intel. The AMD part is a mobile segment chip, the Intel part is desktop. Release dates are 2016-05-30 for AMD and 2011-05-21 for Intel. Neither has a recorded launch MSRP, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The Verdict

The data presents a split verdict. In Cinebench workloads, the Intel Core i5-2405S is consistently ahead across every test, with all margins at 2.9% to 3.1%. In Geekbench workloads, the AMD FX-9830P is decisively ahead, with margins of 12.7% in multi-core and 11.8% in single-core. The average benchmark scores favor the AMD part by 1006 to 991, a 1.5% overall margin.

The Intel part wins five of the seven head-to-head tests, but the AMD part wins the two tests with the largest margins. The average score comparison suggests that, across the full benchmark suite in the database, the AMD FX-9830P holds a slight edge. The Intel part's advantage is consistent but narrow, while the AMD part's advantage is larger but confined to a single suite.

For users prioritizing Cinebench-style rendering workloads, the Intel Core i5-2405S is the better choice based on the recorded data. For users prioritizing Geekbench-style general-purpose workloads, the AMD FX-9830P is clearly superior. The AMD chip also offers the practical advantages of a 35 W TDP, DDR4 support, and higher clock speeds, though these are contextual factors rather than direct performance measurements.

Where Each One Wins

Intel Core i5-2405S wins in Cinebench rendering tests. The Intel part takes all five Cinebench results: R15 multi-core (291 versus 282), R20 multi-core (1213 versus 1178), R20 single-core (171 versus 166), R23 multi-core (2890 versus 2806), and R23 single-core (408 versus 396). The margins are uniform at roughly 3%, suggesting a consistent architectural advantage in this workload. The shared 6 MB L3 cache likely contributes to this pattern, as rendering workloads often benefit from larger cache hierarchies. The Intel part also has 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes versus 8 on the AMD part, which could matter in systems with multiple expansion devices.

AMD FX-9830P wins in Geekbench tests. The AMD part scores 1606 in Geekbench multi-core versus 1425 for Intel, a 12.7% lead, and 605 in Geekbench single-core versus 541, an 11.8% lead. These are the largest margins in the entire comparison. The AMD chip's higher base clock (3.00 GHz versus 2.50 GHz) and boost clock (3.70 GHz versus 3.30 GHz) likely drive this advantage, as does its DDR4 memory support with 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD part also carries a 35 W TDP, which is less than the Intel part's 65 W, making it the more power-efficient option in the database's recorded specifications.

Overall use-case split. Choose the Intel Core i5-2405S for Cinebench-style multi-threaded rendering and for systems that need more PCIe lanes. Choose the AMD FX-9830P for Geekbench-style general-purpose computing, for DDR4 memory platforms, and for lower-power mobile or compact systems where the 35 W TDP is an advantage. The average benchmark score slightly favors the AMD part, so for a balanced workload mix, the data points to the AMD FX-9830P as the marginally stronger overall processor.