AMD Ryzen 5 3400G vs Intel Core i7-8705G Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 3400G and Intel Core i7-8705G are direct rivals in the benchmark database, separated by a mere 0.1% in average benchmark score (2059 vs 2058). However, this statistical tie masks a clear performance split: the AMD chip dominates in Cinebench workloads across the board, while the Intel part wins decisively in Geekbench tests. The data indicates that the 3400G is the stronger multi-threaded rendering processor, whereas the i7-8705G holds the advantage in single-threaded and memory-sensitive workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3400G has an average benchmark score of 2059, while the Intel Core i7-8705G scores 2058. This puts them within 0.1% of each other, with the AMD part holding a razor-thin edge.

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

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3400G scores 7835 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 21.2% ahead of the Intel Core i7-8705G’s 6464. This is the largest multi-core delta between the two processors.

Q: Does the Intel chip win any benchmark categories?

A: Yes. The Intel Core i7-8705G wins both Geekbench tests. It scores 3968 multi-core (6% ahead) and 1277 single-core (13.8% ahead) compared to the AMD’s 3731 and 1101, respectively.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two CPUs?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3400G is built on a 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries, while the Intel Core i7-8705G uses Intel’s 14 nm process. The AMD chip also has a larger die size at 210 mm² versus Intel’s 125 mm².

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen 5 3400G has its multiplier unlocked, allowing overclocking. The Intel Core i7-8705G does not have an unlocked multiplier.

Q: What is the production status of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3400G is listed as "Active" production, while the Intel Core i7-8705G is marked as "End-of-life." The AMD part also has a launch MSRP of $149, while the Intel chip has no launch MSRP listed.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results split clearly by workload type. The AMD Ryzen 5 3400G wins 6 out of 8 head-to-head comparisons, taking every Cinebench test. In Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, the AMD chip leads by a consistent margin of roughly 21% in both single-core and multi-core tests. For example, in Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 3400G scores 7835 versus the i7-8705G’s 6464, a 21.2% advantage. This makes the AMD part the clear choice for rendering, 3D modeling, and any workload that relies heavily on sustained multi-threaded execution.

The Intel Core i7-8705G, despite losing the Cinebench sweep, wins both Geekbench tests. Its Geekbench single-core score of 1277 is 13.8% higher than the AMD’s 1101, and its multi-core score of 3968 is 6% higher. Geekbench tends to reward higher memory bandwidth and certain instruction-level efficiencies, suggesting the Intel chip is better suited for general desktop responsiveness, application launches, and lighter single-threaded tasks where clock-for-clock efficiency matters more than raw sustained throughput.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 5 3400G uses the Zen+ architecture (codename Picasso) built on a 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries, while the Intel Core i7-8705G uses the older Kaby Lake architecture (codename Kaby Lake G) on Intel’s 14 nm process. The AMD chip integrates 4,940 million transistors on a 210 mm² die, whereas the Intel chip has no transistor count listed but occupies a smaller 125 mm² die.

Cache layouts differ significantly. The AMD part provides 96 KB of L1 cache and 512 KB of L2 cache per core, with a shared 4 MB L3 cache. The Intel chip offers less per-core cache (64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2) but doubles the shared L3 to 8 MB. This larger L3 pool on the Intel side likely contributes to its Geekbench wins, as more shared cache can improve hit rates in certain access patterns.

The integrated GPUs also differ. The AMD Ryzen 5 3400G packs the Radeon RX Vega 11, while the Intel Core i7-8705G uses Intel HD Graphics 630. The AMD part also supports a higher memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s versus Intel’s 38.4 GB/s, which benefits its integrated graphics and multi-core compute tasks.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts are identical: both processors feature 4 cores and 8 threads. However, clock speeds differ. The AMD Ryzen 5 3400G has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.20 GHz, while the Intel Core i7-8705G runs at 3.10 GHz base and 4.10 GHz boost. The AMD chip’s higher clocks, especially the 0.60 GHz base-clock advantage, explain its Cinebench dominance.

Both CPUs have a 65 W TDP and support dual-channel DDR4 memory. The AMD part uses the AMD Socket AM4, while the Intel chip uses the Intel BGA 2270 (soldered, mobile-oriented). PCIe support is Gen 3 for both, but the Intel part lists only 8 lanes from the CPU, whereas the AMD part does not specify lane counts. The AMD chip is a desktop-market part with an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel chip is a mobile-market part with a locked multiplier.

Release dates and availability differ: the AMD Ryzen 5 3400G launched on 2019-07-06 and remains active in production, while the Intel Core i7-8705G launched on 2018-01-06 and is end-of-life. The AMD part has a listed launch MSRP of $149; the Intel part has no launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results are a one-sided affair. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen 5 3400G scores 789 versus Intel’s 651, a 21.2% lead. The single-core R15 test shows an even larger gap: 111 vs 91, a 22% advantage for AMD. Moving to R20, the AMD chip scores 3290 multi-core and 464 single-core, beating Intel’s 2714 and 383 by 21.2% and 21.1%, respectively. The pattern holds in R23: AMD’s 7835 multi-core and 1106 single-core beat Intel’s 6464 and 912 by 21.2% and 21.3%.

The Geekbench results flip the script entirely. In Geekbench multi-core, the Intel Core i7-8705G scores 3968 against AMD’s 3731, a 6% win. The single-core test is more decisive: Intel’s 1277 beats AMD’s 1101 by 13.8%. This means the Intel chip is substantially faster in Geekbench’s simulated real-world tasks, which often favor lower latency, better branch prediction, and higher per-core efficiency.

The overall tally is 6 wins for AMD and 2 for Intel. The AMD wins are all in Cinebench and are remarkably consistent in magnitude (21-22%), suggesting a systematic advantage in sustained multi-threaded rendering. The Intel wins are in Geekbench, with the single-core margin (13.8%) being nearly twice the multi-core margin (6%).

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split decision. The AMD Ryzen 5 3400G is the superior choice for any workload that stresses sustained multi-core performance. Its 21.2% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core (7835 vs 6464) is a decisive margin that will translate to faster video rendering, 3D scene compilation, and batch photo processing. The consistent 21-22% advantage across all three Cinebench versions indicates this is not a fluke but a fundamental throughput difference, driven by the AMD chip’s higher 4.20 GHz boost clock and 46.9 GB/s memory bandwidth.

The Intel Core i7-8705G, however, is the better option for users who prioritize single-threaded responsiveness and Geekbench-style workloads. Its 13.8% single-core Geekbench lead (1277 vs 1101) and 6% multi-core lead (3968 vs 3731) suggest that everyday desktop tasks, web browsing, and office applications may feel snappier on the Intel platform. The Intel chip’s larger 8 MB L3 cache likely plays a role here, offering better cache hit rates for latency-sensitive code.

For buyers, the choice hinges on the primary use case. If the system is a dedicated workstation for rendering or encoding, the AMD Ryzen 5 3400G is the obvious pick — its Cinebench dominance is unambiguous. If the system will serve as a general-purpose desktop where single-threaded speed matters more, the Intel Core i7-8705G’s Geekbench wins make it competitive. The AMD part also offers the practical advantages of an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, an active production status, and a launch MSRP of $149, though the Intel part’s end-of-life status may make it harder to source. Ultimately, the 0.1% average score difference (2059 vs 2058) tells the real story: these are evenly matched processors that excel in different domains.