AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 vs Intel Core i5-7400T Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents a remarkably consistent picture: the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 wins every single benchmark in the head-to-head comparison against the Intel Core i5-7400T. Across six Cinebench tests, the AMD processor holds a lead that hovers tightly around 16.3% to 16.5%. There is no test where the Intel chip manages to close the gap or take a win, making this a clean sweep for the Ryzen part.

Starting with multicore performance, the Cinebench R15 multicore test shows the Intel i5-7400T scoring 401 points against the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200's 480 points, a delta of 16.5% in favor of AMD. Moving to Cinebench R20 multicore, the scores rise to 1672 for Intel and 2002 for AMD, again a 16.5% difference. The Cinebench R23 multicore test repeats the pattern with 3981 versus 4767, another 16.5% margin. These results indicate that the Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 delivers a consistent multicore advantage across different rendering workloads and engine versions.

Single-core performance tells the same story. In Cinebench R15 single-core, Intel scores 56 while AMD scores 67, a 16.4% delta. Cinebench R20 single-core has Intel at 236 and AMD at 282, a 16.3% difference. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 562 versus 673, a 16.5% margin. The consistency of these deltas across both single-threaded and multi-threaded tests suggests that the AMD chip's advantage is not workload-specific but rather a fundamental performance edge in this benchmark suite.

The average benchmark score further corroborates this dominance. The Intel i5-7400T has an average benchmark score of 1348, while the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 averages 1379. Although this aggregate gap is smaller, around 2.3%, it reflects the fact that the head-to-head Cinebench tests are only a subset of the measured benchmarks. Both processors sit at the 36th percentile among all CPUs, indicating they occupy a similar overall performance tier, yet within the direct comparison, AMD consistently pulls ahead.

The data also reveals that the Intel i5-7400T has additional Geekbench scores listed in its benchmark set: 2864 for multicore and 1014 for single-core. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 lacks Geekbench results in the database, so a direct comparison on that test is not possible. However, the available Cinebench data is unambiguous: the Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 outperforms the i5-7400T by roughly 16.5% in every shared test, with no exceptions.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the recorded benchmarks, the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 wins in every category where both CPUs have data: multicore rendering, single-core rendering, and both older and newer Cinebench versions. There is no benchmark category in the head-to-head list where the Intel Core i5-7400T emerges victorious. The wins for AMD are consistent across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, covering both multicore and single-core sub-tests.

For use-case analysis, this means the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 is the stronger choice for workloads that rely on Cinebench-style rendering, which typically reflects 3D rendering, animation, and other CPU-intensive creative tasks. The consistent 16.5% lead in both single-core and multicore tests implies that the AMD chip would handle both lightly-threaded applications, such as everyday desktop tasks, and heavily-threaded workloads, such as video encoding or 3D scene rendering, with better performance.

The Intel Core i5-7400T does have one distinct advantage that is not captured in the head-to-head benchmarks: it includes integrated graphics (HD 630), while the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 does not list any integrated graphics. For a system builder who needs to avoid a discrete GPU entirely, the Intel part offers a functional path, though the performance penalty in CPU-bound tasks would be significant. The AMD chip, by contrast, requires an external graphics card, but delivers superior CPU performance across every measured metric.

The Intel chip also has a lower TDP of 35 watts versus the AMD's 65 watts, which could matter for power-constrained environments, but this is a specification difference rather than a benchmark win. In terms of pure computational performance, the database shows no category where the Intel i5-7400T wins.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The Intel Core i5-7400T is built on Kaby Lake architecture, manufactured by Intel on a 14 nm process. It has 4 cores and 4 threads, with a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.00 GHz. The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 uses the Zen architecture, also known as Summit Ridge, produced by GlobalFoundries on the same 14 nm process node. It matches Intel in core and thread count at 4 cores and 4 threads, but runs at a higher base clock of 3.10 GHz and a boost clock of 3.40 GHz.

Cache configurations differ notably. The Intel chip has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and a shared 6 MB L3 cache. The AMD processor offers 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and a shared 8 MB L3 cache. The larger cache hierarchy on the AMD side, particularly the 33% larger L3 cache and double the L2 cache per core, likely contributes to its performance advantage in the benchmark results.

The memory support also diverges. Both CPUs support DDR4 memory and use a dual-channel memory bus, but the Intel i5-7400T lists a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, while the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 lists 4256 MB/s (or 4.256 GB/s), a substantial difference. Additionally, the AMD chip supports ECC memory, while the Intel chip does not. This makes the Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 a candidate for systems requiring error-correcting memory, a common need in professional or server-adjacent workloads.

Other architectural differences include the transistor count and die size, which are only listed for the AMD part: 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die. The Intel part has no such data recorded. The sockets differ as well, with Intel using Socket 1151 and AMD using Socket AM4. The AMD processor also has an unlocked multiplier, enabling overclocking, while the Intel i5-7400T is locked. The integrated graphics presence on the Intel chip (HD 630) versus its absence on the AMD chip is another key architectural split.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in single-core performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 is faster in all single-core tests. In Cinebench R15 single-core, it scores 67 versus 56 for the Intel i5-7400T, a 16.4% advantage. In R20, it scores 282 versus 236, and in R23, 673 versus 562, each around 16.5% ahead.

Q: How do the two compare in multicore rendering?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 wins every multicore test by 16.5%. Specifically, Cinebench R15 multicore shows 480 versus 401, R20 multicore shows 2002 versus 1672, and R23 multicore shows 4767 versus 3981.

Q: Does the Intel processor have any benchmark where it beats the AMD one?

A: No. In the head-to-head comparison, the Intel Core i5-7400T wins zero tests, while the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 wins all six. The Intel chip does have Geekbench scores (2864 multicore, 1014 single-core) that are not recorded for the AMD chip, so no comparison is possible there.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory type?

A: Both support DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus. However, the Intel i5-7400T has a recorded memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, while the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 lists 4256 MB/s. The AMD chip also supports ECC memory, which the Intel chip does not.

Q: Are both processors on the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes, both are built on a 14 nm process. The Intel chip is fabricated by Intel using Kaby Lake architecture, while the AMD chip is fabricated by GlobalFoundries using Zen architecture.

Q: Which processor has a higher clock speed?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 has both a higher base clock (3.10 GHz versus 2.40 GHz) and a higher boost clock (3.40 GHz versus 3.00 GHz) compared to the Intel Core i5-7400T.

Specification Differences

The table below highlights only the fields where the two processors differ, based on the recorded data:

| Specification | Intel Core i5-7400T | AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 |

|---|---|---|

| Base Clock | 2.40 GHz | 3.10 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.00 GHz | 3.40 GHz |

| TDP | 35 W | 65 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1151 | AMD Socket AM4 |

| Architecture / Codename | Kaby Lake | Zen (Summit Ridge) |

| Foundry | Intel | GlobalFoundries |

| L1 Cache (per core) | 64 KB | 96 KB |

| L2 Cache (per core) | 256 KB | 512 KB |

| L3 Cache (shared) | 6 MB | 8 MB |

| Memory Bandwidth | 38.4 GB/s | 4256 MB/s |

| ECC Memory Support | No | Yes |

| Integrated Graphics | HD 630 | None |

| Transistor Count | Not recorded | 4,800 million |

| Die Size | Not recorded | 213 mm² |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Part Number | SR332 | YD120BBBM4KAE |

| Release Date | 2017-01-02 | 2017-06-28 |

Both CPUs share the same core count (4), thread count (4), process node (14 nm), memory type (DDR4), memory bus (dual-channel), PCIe configuration (Gen 3, 16 lanes), market segment (Desktop), production status (Active), and percentile ranking (36th).

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 is the faster processor in every measured test. It leads the Intel Core i5-7400T by approximately 16.5% across all Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 subtests, whether single-core or multicore. The AMD chip achieves this with higher base and boost clocks, a larger cache hierarchy, and more memory bandwidth, despite a higher TDP of 65 watts versus Intel's 35 watts.

Users who prioritize raw CPU performance for rendering, encoding, or other compute-heavy tasks should choose the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200. Its consistent 16.5% lead means faster completion times in workloads that resemble Cinebench rendering. The unlocked multiplier on the AMD part also offers additional performance potential through overclocking, which the locked Intel chip cannot provide.

However, the Intel Core i5-7400T has its own merits. Its integrated HD 630 graphics means it can operate in a system without a discrete GPU, which the AMD chip cannot. For a basic office PC or a low-power media box where graphics output is needed and CPU rendering performance is secondary, the Intel part is viable. Its 35-watt TDP also makes it easier to cool and power in compact or silent builds.

The ECC memory support on the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 1200 is a significant differentiator for professional environments where data integrity is critical. The Intel chip lacks this feature entirely. Combined with the superior benchmark scores, the AMD processor appears better suited for workstation-like duties, while the Intel processor serves scenarios requiring integrated graphics and minimal power draw. The data clearly favors AMD for performance, but the final choice depends on whether the user's system can accommodate a discrete GPU and the higher power envelope.