AMD Ryzen 5 40 vs Intel Core 5 221E Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark results show a complete sweep for the Intel Core 5 221E across all 15 head-to-head tests. The AMD Ryzen 5 40 does not win a single comparison, with the closest margin being a 40.3% deficit in single-thread workloads. The Intel part delivers 4147 in PassMark single-thread versus 2477 for the AMD, a substantial gap that carries through every other test category.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel Core 5 221E scores 25933 against the AMD Ryzen 5 40's 4841, which puts the Intel part 81.3% ahead. The single-core R23 result follows the same pattern: 3661 versus 1150, a 68.6% advantage. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 2613 versus 790, a 69.8% lead, while R15 single-core shows 368 versus 165.5, a 55% lead. These results indicate that the Intel processor holds a commanding lead in both lightly threaded and heavily threaded rendering workloads.

The PassMark suite reinforces the pattern. Integer math scores 117813 for Intel versus 31598 for AMD, a 73.2% difference. Floating point math shows 79028 versus 15194, an 80.8% lead. The prime number finding test shows 173 versus 20, the largest relative gap in the entire dataset at 88.4%. Data compression favors Intel at 324285 versus 141533, a 56.4% gap. Data encryption shows 19205 versus 6646, a 65.4% difference. Extended instruction throughput lands at 18216 versus 6437, a 64.7% margin. Random string sorting completes at 37686 versus 15124, a 59.9% difference. Multi-threaded PassMark scores show 30510 versus 9341, a 69.4% lead, while physics simulation scores 2230 versus 432, an 80.6% margin. The single-thread PassMark scores, as mentioned, close at 4147 versus 2477.

The average benchmark scores place the Intel Core 5 221E at 40144 compared to 15882 for the AMD Ryzen 5 40. That places the Intel part in the 87th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the AMD part sits in the 70th percentile. The nearest rivals for the Intel chip include the AMD Ryzen 7 7700 at an average score of 40081 (0.2% behind), the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 at 40048 (0.2% behind), the AMD Ryzen 9 270 at 40246 (0.3% ahead), and the Intel Core i9-13905H at 40313 (0.4% ahead). The AMD Ryzen 5 40's nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 75F3 at 15859 (0.1% behind), the Intel Core Ultra 5 134U at 15910 (0.2% ahead), the AMD EPYC 9354P at 15826 (0.4% behind), and the AMD EPYC 9334 at 15940 (0.4% ahead). The data places the Intel chip in a performance class roughly 2.5 times higher than the AMD part by average score.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the Intel Core 5 221E is the stronger processor in every measured workload. The 15-0 sweep in head-to-head tests leaves no ambiguity. Anyone selecting between these two parts for tasks that involve rendering, encryption, compression, physics simulation, or general computational throughput should choose the Intel part based on the recorded measurements.

The AMD Ryzen 5 40 still has a place in systems where its characteristics matter more than raw performance. It is a mobile processor on an AMD Socket FT6 platform with a 15 watt TDP, while the Intel part is a desktop processor on Intel Socket 1700 with a 65 watt TDP. The TDP difference is substantial, and the AMD part's mobile positioning means it fits in low-power designs where the Intel part cannot go. The database shows the AMD chip as a mobile segment processor, while the Intel chip is a desktop segment processor.

For workloads that benefit from single-thread speed, the Intel part's 40.3% lead in PassMark single-thread and 68.6% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core make it the clear choice. For multi-threaded workloads, the margins grow even larger, with an 81.3% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core. The Intel part also supports ECC memory, which the AMD part does not, and it carries a launch MSRP of $232. The AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP.

The percentile data reinforces the verdict. The Intel Core 5 221E sits at the 87th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the AMD Ryzen 5 40 sits at the 70th percentile. The Intel chip's nearest rivals are all high-end desktop and mobile processors. The AMD chip's nearest rivals are server processors and a low-power Intel Ultra part, all scoring within 0.4% of each other. The performance tiers are clearly different.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The AMD Ryzen 5 40 uses the Zen 2 architecture with the Mendocino codename, built on a 6 nm process at TSMC with a die size of 100 mm². The Intel Core 5 221E uses the Bartlett Lake codename, built on a 10 nm process at Intel with a die size of 257 mm².

Core counts differ significantly. The AMD part has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Intel part has 14 cores and 20 threads. That core and thread advantage is a primary driver of the multi-threaded benchmark results. The Intel part also has a higher boost clock at 5.20 GHz versus 4.30 GHz for the AMD part. Base clocks are closer at 2.70 GHz for Intel and 2.80 GHz for AMD.

Cache configurations differ across all levels. The AMD part has 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger L3 cache on the Intel part is 6 times the size of the AMD part's L3, which helps explain some of the performance margins in cache-sensitive workloads.

Memory support differs as well. The AMD part supports LPDDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration with 88.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration with 89.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The bandwidth figures are close, but the memory types are different. The AMD part does not support ECC memory, while the Intel part does.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The AMD part provides PCIe Gen 3 with 4 lanes from the CPU. The Intel part provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. That is a major difference for expansion capability. The Intel part's integrated graphics is UHD Graphics 730, while the AMD part uses Radeon 610M.

Production status for both parts is active. The AMD part released on September 30, 2025, while the Intel part released on January 12, 2025. Neither part has an unlocked multiplier. The Intel part has a recorded part number of SRQDVQ659, while the AMD part's part number is unknown.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 5 221E has 14 cores and 20 threads. The AMD Ryzen 5 40 has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What is the single-thread performance difference?

A: In PassMark single-thread, the Intel Core 5 221E scores 4147 versus 2477 for the AMD Ryzen 5 40, a 40.3% lead. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Intel part scores 3661 versus 1150, a 68.6% lead.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core 5 221E supports ECC memory. The AMD Ryzen 5 40 does not.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 40 supports LPDDR5 memory. The Intel Core 5 221E supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for these processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 40 has a 15 watt TDP. The Intel Core 5 221E has a 65 watt TDP.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 5 221E has a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The AMD Ryzen 5 40 has a boost clock of 4.30 GHz.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor have?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 40 has 4 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core 5 221E has 24 MB of shared L3 cache.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 221E wins in every benchmark category recorded in the database. The largest margins appear in prime number finding at 88.4%, Cinebench R23 multi-core at 81.3%, floating point math at 80.8%, and physics simulation at 80.6%. These are workloads that scale with core count, cache size, and high boost clocks, all areas where the Intel part has the advantage.

The AMD Ryzen 5 40 shows no benchmark wins in the recorded data. Its role in a system would be defined by its platform characteristics rather than performance. It is a mobile processor with a 15 watt TDP, built on a 6 nm process at TSMC, and designed for the AMD Socket FT6 platform. Systems that need low power consumption, a small die size of 100 mm², and LPDDR5 memory support would use this part. The data does not show any workload where it outperforms the Intel part.

The Intel Core 5 221E, by contrast, is a desktop processor on Intel Socket 1700 with PCIe Gen 5 support and 16 CPU lanes. It uses DDR4 or DDR5 memory, supports ECC, and has a die size of 257 mm². Its 24 MB of shared L3 cache and 14 cores make it suitable for multi-threaded desktop workloads. The recorded benchmark scores confirm that it dominates rendering, encryption, compression, physics, and math workloads in the database.

The use case split is therefore defined by platform rather than performance. The AMD part serves mobile, low-power designs. The Intel part serves desktop systems that need maximum throughput across the measured benchmarks. The AMD part's 6 nm process node indicates a more modern manufacturing process than the Intel part's 10 nm node, but the recorded performance data does not translate that process advantage into benchmark wins. The Intel part's higher TDP allows it to sustain higher clocks and feed more cores, which explains the consistent margins across all 15 tests.

For buyers assembling a desktop system with the intent to run CPU-intensive workloads, the database points clearly to the Intel Core 5 221E. For buyers building a low-power mobile system where the 15 watt TDP and the AMD Socket FT6 platform are requirements, the AMD Ryzen 5 40 is the only option of the two that fits. The Intel part's 65 watt TDP and desktop socket make it unsuitable for that class of system. The two parts do not compete in the same market segment, and the benchmark results reflect the performance difference that comes with those different design goals.

Specification Differences

The AMD Ryzen 5 40 and Intel Core 5 221E differ in nearly every specification field recorded in the database. The AMD part uses the Zen 2 architecture with the Mendocino codename, while the Intel part uses the Bartlett Lake codename. The AMD part is built on a 6 nm process at TSMC with a 100 mm² die size, while the Intel part is built on a 10 nm process at Intel with a 257 mm² die size.

Core and thread counts differ: 4 cores and 8 threads for AMD, 14 cores and 20 threads for Intel. Base clocks are 2.80 GHz for AMD and 2.70 GHz for Intel. Boost clocks are 4.30 GHz for AMD and 5.20 GHz for Intel. TDP ratings are 15 watts for AMD and 65 watts for Intel.

Cache hierarchies differ in all three levels. L1 cache is 64 KB per core for AMD and 80 KB per core for Intel. L2 cache is 512 KB per core for AMD and 2 MB per core for Intel. L3 cache is 4 MB shared for AMD and 24 MB shared for Intel.

Memory support differs: LPDDR5 for AMD, DDR4 and DDR5 for Intel. Memory bandwidth is 88.0 GB/s for AMD and 89.6 GB/s for Intel. ECC memory support is absent for AMD and present for Intel. PCIe support is Gen 3 with 4 lanes for AMD and Gen 5 with 16 lanes for Intel.

Integrated graphics differ: Radeon 610M for AMD, UHD Graphics 730 for Intel. Market segments differ: mobile for AMD, desktop for Intel. Sockets differ: AMD Socket FT6 for AMD, Intel Socket 1700 for Intel. Release dates differ: September 30, 2025 for AMD, January 12, 2025 for Intel. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $232 and a recorded part number of SRQDVQ659. The AMD part has no launch MSRP and an unknown part number. Neither part has an unlocked multiplier. Both parts are currently in active production.