AMD Ryzen 5 240 vs Intel Core 7 253PE Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data shows an unusually one-sided comparison. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 does not win a single head-to-head contest across the fifteen measured workloads in the database. The Intel Core 7 253PE takes all fifteen, but the margins vary dramatically depending on the workload type, which points to distinct use-case strengths.

The Intel part's largest advantages appear in heavily multithreaded, compute-dense tasks. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel Core 7 253PE scores 24,880 versus 13,013 for the AMD Ryzen 5 240, a delta of -47.7% from AMD's perspective, meaning the Intel chip is roughly 91% faster. The same pattern holds in PassMark floating-point math (80,870 versus 45,301, a -44% delta) and integer math (114,158 versus 73,189, a -35.9% delta). These are workloads where the Intel part's 10 cores and 20 threads simply overpower the AMD's 6 cores and 12 threads.

However, the gap narrows considerably in single-threaded and memory-latency-sensitive tasks. In PassMark random string sorting, the Intel part wins by only 1.2% (32,777 versus 32,385). In PassMark single-thread, the gap is 7.1% (3,955 versus 3,675). The extended instructions test shows a 7.4% difference (21,806 versus 20,201). These smaller deltas suggest that for lightly threaded productivity work, the two processors are far closer in real-world responsiveness, with the Intel chip retaining a modest but consistent edge.

The use-case split is therefore clear: the Intel Core 7 253PE is the dominant choice for rendering, physics simulation, encryption, compression, and any workload that scales across cores. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 remains competitive in single-threaded and short-burst tasks, but the database shows no workload category where it pulls ahead.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 is built on the Zen 4 architecture with the Hawk Point codename, manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It integrates 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The Intel Core 7 253PE uses the Bartlett Lake codename, manufactured on Intel's 10 nm process, with no transistor or die size data recorded in the database.

Core configuration differs sharply. The AMD part offers 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 4.30 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel part offers 10 cores and 20 threads, with a lower base clock of 2.50 GHz but a higher boost clock of 5.50 GHz. This explains why the Intel chip wins single-threaded tests despite a much lower base frequency: its maximum boost is 0.50 GHz higher, and its architecture clearly extracts more performance per clock in the recorded tests.

Cache hierarchies also diverge. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The Intel Core 7 253PE has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 33 MB of shared L3. The Intel part's larger per-core L2 and more than double the L3 capacity likely contributes to its wins in data compression and encryption, where working sets benefit from larger on-chip storage.

Memory support differs as well. The AMD part supports only DDR5, while the Intel part supports both DDR4 and DDR5. Both use a dual-channel memory bus and record identical memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s in the database. The Intel part adds ECC memory support, which the AMD part lacks. PCIe connectivity also differs: the AMD part offers Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes, while the Intel part offers Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes.

The integrated graphics are different tiers. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 carries a Radeon 760M, while the Intel Core 7 253PE has UHD Graphics 730. Neither processor has a record of benchmark scores for graphics in this database, so any comparison there is qualitative.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a decisive overall winner. The Intel Core 7 253PE holds a higher average benchmark score of 40,557 versus 33,542 for the AMD Ryzen 5 240, and it sits in the 87th percentile of all CPUs compared to the AMD's 84th percentile. In the head-to-head table, the Intel part wins all fifteen tests, with margins ranging from 1.2% to 50.4%.

For workloads that use many cores, the choice is unambiguous. The Intel chip's 10-core, 20-thread configuration delivers roughly double the multi-threaded Cinebench R23 score and nearly double the floating-point math throughput. Rendering, video encoding, physics simulation, and data processing tasks will see substantial gains on the Intel part.

For single-threaded or lightly threaded workloads, the Intel part still wins, but by a smaller margin. The 7.1% single-thread lead and 1.2% random string sorting lead indicate that the AMD Ryzen 5 240 is not embarrassing itself in everyday tasks. Its higher base clock of 4.30 GHz helps keep it responsive in short bursts, even though its lower boost clock and smaller core count limit its peak output.

The Intel part's platform also offers more flexibility: dual memory support (DDR4 and DDR5), ECC memory, and PCIe Gen 5 connectivity. The AMD part counters with a smaller process node (4 nm versus 10 nm), which typically implies better power efficiency per unit of work, though no power consumption measurements are recorded in this database beyond the TDP figures of 45 W for AMD and 65 W for Intel.

The launch MSRP for the Intel Core 7 253PE is $384. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 has no launch MSRP recorded in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 7 253PE has 10 cores and 20 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 5 240 has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds?

A: The Intel Core 7 253PE boosts to 5.50 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen 5 240 boosts to 5.00 GHz.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core 7 253PE supports ECC memory. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 does not.

Q: Which processor has the larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core 7 253PE has 33 MB of shared L3 cache, while the AMD Ryzen 5 240 has 16 MB.

Q: Which processor wins in single-threaded performance?

A: The Intel Core 7 253PE wins in PassMark single-thread with a score of 3,955 versus 3,675 for the AMD, a 7.1% lead. It also wins Cinebench R23 single-core with 3,512 versus 1,742, a 50.4% lead.

Q: What is the process node for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 240 uses a 4 nm process at TSMC, while the Intel Core 7 253PE uses Intel's 10 nm process.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the Intel Core 7 253PE occurs in Cinebench R23 single-core. The Intel part scores 3,512 against the AMD's 1,742, a delta of -50.4%. This is the single biggest margin in the entire head-to-head table. The multi-core version of the same test shows a -47.7% delta (24,880 versus 13,013), indicating that the Intel advantage holds across both single-threaded and multithreaded rendering.

PassMark floating-point math shows a -44% delta (80,870 versus 45,301), and PassMark physics shows a -42.5% delta (1,845 versus 1,060). These tests are compute-heavy and benefit from the Intel part's higher core count and boost clock. PassMark find prime numbers shows a -49.3% delta (138 versus 70), another massive gap that suggests the Intel architecture is significantly better at pure integer iteration.

The Intel part also dominates in PassMark integer math (114,158 versus 73,189, -35.9%) and PassMark multithread (29,271 versus 22,658, -22.6%). Data compression shows a -21% delta (339,133 versus 267,963), and data encryption shows a -13.8% delta (18,385 versus 15,849). These are more moderate but still clear wins.

The narrowest margins are in PassMark random string sorting (-1.2%, 32,777 versus 32,385) and PassMark extended instructions (-7.4%, 21,806 versus 20,201). PassMark single-thread shows -7.1% (3,955 versus 3,675). Cinebench R15 multi-core shows -17.1% (2,507 versus 2,078), and Cinebench R15 single-core shows -23.7% (354 versus 270).

The pattern across all fifteen tests is consistent: the Intel Core 7 253PE wins every workload, with the margin scaling roughly with core utilization and instruction complexity. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 comes closest in tasks that stress memory access patterns (string sorting) and moderately threaded instruction sets (extended instructions), but it never reaches parity.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two processors in the database:

• Manufacturer: AMD versus Intel
• Cores: 6 versus 10
• Threads: 12 versus 20
• Base clock: 4.30 GHz versus 2.50 GHz
• Boost clock: 5.00 GHz versus 5.50 GHz
• TDP: 45 W versus 65 W
• Socket: AMD Socket FP8 versus Intel Socket 1700
• Codename: Hawk Point versus Bartlett Lake
• Process node: 4 nm versus 10 nm
• Foundry: TSMC versus Intel
• Transistors: 25,000 million versus not recorded
• Die size: 178 mm² versus not recorded
• L1 cache: 64 KB per core versus 80 KB per core
• L2 cache: 1 MB per core versus 2 MB per core
• L3 cache: 16 MB shared versus 33 MB shared
• Memory support: DDR5 only versus DDR4 and DDR5
• ECC memory: false versus true
• PCIe: Gen 4, 20 lanes versus Gen 5, 16 lanes
• Integrated graphics: Radeon 760M versus UHD Graphics 730
• Market segment: Mobile versus Desktop
• Release date: 2025-01-05 versus 2026-03-08
• Launch MSRP: not recorded versus $384
• Part number: 100-000001727 versus SA4QE

The two processors share a dual-channel memory bus and identical recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. Both are locked (multiplier unlocked: false), both are in active production, and both have no recorded total L3 or 3D V-Cache figures.