AMD Ryzen 5 40 vs Intel Core 7 251E Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for the AMD Ryzen 5 40 includes fifteen distinct benchmark scores, while the Intel Core 7 251E has no benchmark entries in the database. This asymmetry means the head-to-head comparison is one-sided: the AMD processor contributes all measurable performance results, and the Intel processor is represented solely by its architectural and specification profile.

The AMD Ryzen 5 40 posts a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 4841 points. Its single-core result in the same test is 1150 points. In Cinebench R15, the multicore score reaches 790 points, with a single-core score of 165.5 points. These Cinebench results indicate a balanced processor that delivers roughly four times the multicore throughput relative to its single-core performance in each version of the test, which is consistent with its 4-core, 8-thread configuration.

PassMark results for the AMD processor cover a wider range of workloads. The multithread score is 9341, while the single-thread score is 2477. Integer math completes at 31598 points, and floating point math reaches 15194 points. Data compression scores 141533, data encryption scores 6646, and extended instructions score 6437. Prime number finding is markedly lower at 20 points, while random string sorting posts 15124 points. Physics simulation scores 432 points. The average benchmark score across all recorded tests for the AMD Ryzen 5 40 is 15882.

The AMD processor sits at the 70th percentile among all CPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals, based on average benchmark score, are tightly clustered. The AMD EPYC 75F3 averages 15859, which is 0.1% lower than the Ryzen 5 40. The Intel Core Ultra 5 134U averages 15910, which is 0.2% higher. The AMD EPYC 9354P averages 15826, 0.4% lower, and the AMD EPYC 9334 averages 15940, 0.4% higher. These deltas are all within half a percent, meaning the Ryzen 5 40 performs essentially on par with a group of enterprise-class server processors and a mid-range mobile chip from Intel, despite being a low-power mobile part with only four cores. The data shows the Ryzen 5 40 holds its own against processors with far higher core counts in aggregate benchmark scoring, which suggests its per-core efficiency is strong.

The Intel Core 7 251E has no benchmark scores recorded, no average benchmark score, no percentile ranking beyond 50, and no nearest rivals listed. Therefore, no direct numerical comparison between the two processors is possible from the database. Any statement about which processor wins a specific workload must rely on the AMD processor's recorded performance alone, without a corresponding Intel score to contrast.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 5 40 uses the Zen 2 architecture under the Mendocino codename, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The die size measures 100 mm². It contains 4 cores and 8 threads. The base clock is 2.80 GHz, and the boost clock reaches 4.30 GHz. Thermal design power is 15 watts, placing it firmly in the low-power mobile segment. The socket is AMD Socket FT6, and the market segment is Mobile. The processor is not multiplier-unlocked.

The Intel Core 7 251E uses the Bartlett Lake codename, fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The die size measures 257 mm². It contains 24 cores and 32 threads. The base clock is 2.10 GHz, and the boost clock reaches 5.60 GHz. Thermal design power is 65 watts, which is more than four times the AMD part's TDP. The socket is Intel Socket 1700, and the market segment is Desktop. The processor is not multiplier-unlocked.

Cache structures differ substantially. The AMD Ryzen 5 40 has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 4 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core 7 251E has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part's L3 cache is nine times larger in total, and its per-core L2 cache is four times larger. These differences reflect the core count disparity: the Intel processor needs more cache to feed 24 cores.

Memory support diverges as well. The AMD processor supports LPDDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 88.0 GB/s. ECC memory is not supported. The Intel processor supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. ECC memory is supported. The bandwidth figures are nearly identical, with the Intel part leading by 1.6 GB/s, but the memory types and ECC capability differ.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The AMD Ryzen 5 40 provides PCIe Gen 3 with 4 lanes, CPU only. The Intel Core 7 251E provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, CPU only. The Intel part offers both a newer PCIe generation and four times the lane count.

Integrated graphics differ: the AMD processor uses Radeon 610M, while the Intel processor uses UHD Graphics 770. Neither processor has a recorded launch MSRP in the AMD case, but the Intel processor has a launch MSRP of $384. The AMD processor was released on 2025-09-30, while the Intel processor was released on 2025-01-12.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 7 251E has 24 cores and 32 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 5 40 has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What is the thermal design power difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 40 has a TDP of 15 watts, while the Intel Core 7 251E has a TDP of 65 watts.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core 7 251E supports ECC memory. The AMD Ryzen 5 40 does not.

Q: How do the boost clocks compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 40 boosts to 4.30 GHz, while the Intel Core 7 251E boosts to 5.60 GHz.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 40 supports LPDDR5. The Intel Core 7 251E supports both DDR4 and DDR5.

Q: Does the database contain benchmark scores for the Intel Core 7 251E?

A: No. The Intel Core 7 251E has no recorded benchmark entries, no average benchmark score, and no nearest rivals. All benchmark data in this comparison comes from the AMD Ryzen 5 40.

Specification Differences

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

• Cores: AMD Ryzen 5 40 has 4, Intel Core 7 251E has 24.
• Threads: AMD Ryzen 5 40 has 8, Intel Core 7 251E has 32.
• Base clock: AMD Ryzen 5 40 runs at 2.80 GHz, Intel Core 7 251E runs at 2.10 GHz.
• Boost clock: AMD Ryzen 5 40 reaches 4.30 GHz, Intel Core 7 251E reaches 5.60 GHz.
• TDP: AMD Ryzen 5 40 is rated at 15 watts, Intel Core 7 251E is rated at 65 watts.
• Socket: AMD Ryzen 5 40 uses AMD Socket FT6, Intel Core 7 251E uses Intel Socket 1700.
• Codename: AMD Ryzen 5 40 is Mendocino, Intel Core 7 251E is Bartlett Lake.
• Generation: AMD Ryzen 5 40 is Ryzen 5 (Zen 2 (Mendocino)), Intel Core 7 251E is Core 7 (Bartlett Lake).
• Process node: AMD Ryzen 5 40 is 6 nm, Intel Core 7 251E is 10 nm.
• Foundry: AMD Ryzen 5 40 uses TSMC, Intel Core 7 251E uses Intel.
• Die size: AMD Ryzen 5 40 measures 100 mm², Intel Core 7 251E measures 257 mm².
• L1 cache: AMD Ryzen 5 40 has 64 KB per core, Intel Core 7 251E has 80 KB per core.
• L2 cache: AMD Ryzen 5 40 has 512 KB per core, Intel Core 7 251E has 2 MB per core.
• L3 cache: AMD Ryzen 5 40 has 4 MB shared, Intel Core 7 251E has 36 MB shared.
• Memory support: AMD Ryzen 5 40 supports LPDDR5, Intel Core 7 251E supports DDR4 and DDR5.
• Memory bandwidth: AMD Ryzen 5 40 is 88.0 GB/s, Intel Core 7 251E is 89.6 GB/s.
• ECC memory: AMD Ryzen 5 40 does not support it, Intel Core 7 251E does.
• PCIe: AMD Ryzen 5 40 is Gen 3 with 4 lanes, Intel Core 7 251E is Gen 5 with 16 lanes.
• Integrated graphics: AMD Ryzen 5 40 uses Radeon 610M, Intel Core 7 251E uses UHD Graphics 770.
• Market segment: AMD Ryzen 5 40 is Mobile, Intel Core 7 251E is Desktop.
• Release date: AMD Ryzen 5 40 is 2025-09-30, Intel Core 7 251E is 2025-01-12.
• Launch MSRP: AMD Ryzen 5 40 has none recorded, Intel Core 7 251E has $384.
• Part number: AMD Ryzen 5 40 is unknown, Intel Core 7 251E is SRQDUQ657.

Fields that are the same: both have dual-channel memory buses, both are not multiplier-unlocked, both are active in production, and both lack recorded transistor counts and vCache3d data.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 40 wins in the domain of recorded benchmark performance. Every score in the database belongs to this processor. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 4841 and single-core score of 1150, its PassMark multithread score of 9341 and single-thread score of 2477, and its average benchmark score of 15882 all serve as the only quantitative performance evidence available. The processor also wins on power efficiency, with a 15-watt TDP against the Intel part's 65 watts, and on manufacturing process, using a 6 nm node versus 10 nm. Its die size of 100 mm² is smaller, and its release date is later.

The Intel Core 7 251E wins on raw architectural capacity. It offers 24 cores and 32 threads versus 4 cores and 8 threads, a 5.60 GHz boost clock versus 4.30 GHz, and a 36 MB shared L3 cache versus 4 MB. It supports ECC memory, which the AMD part does not. It provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the AMD part provides Gen 3 with 4 lanes. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, whereas the AMD part supports only LPDDR5. Its memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s is marginally higher than 88.0 GB/s. It has a larger die at 257 mm², which aligns with its higher core count. The Intel part also has a recorded launch MSRP of $384, while the AMD part has no launch MSRP in the database.

For workloads that scale with core count, the Intel processor's 24 cores and 32 threads provide six times the core count and four times the thread count. For workloads that depend on single-thread boost frequency, the Intel part's 5.60 GHz boost clock is 1.30 GHz higher. For workloads that require large shared cache, the Intel part's 36 MB L3 is nine times larger. For memory-intensive tasks that need ECC reliability, the Intel part is the only option.

For workloads that run on low power budgets, the AMD processor's 15-watt TDP is the clear fit. For mobile or compact systems, the AMD part's Mobile market segment and smaller die size are advantages. For tasks measured by the recorded benchmarks, the AMD processor is the only one with data, so it is the sole verified performer in the database.

The Verdict

The database presents an incomplete comparison. The AMD Ryzen 5 40 has fifteen benchmark scores, a 70th percentile ranking, an average benchmark score of 15882, and four nearest rivals within a 0.4% delta. The Intel Core 7 251E has no benchmark scores, no average score, a 50th percentile ranking, and no rivals. Any conclusion about which processor delivers better performance cannot be drawn from head-to-head numbers, because none exist for the Intel part.

The specification data suggests a division of roles. The AMD Ryzen 5 40 is a 4-core, 8-thread mobile processor with a 15-watt TDP, Zen 2 architecture on 6 nm, LPDDR5 memory support, and PCIe Gen 3 with 4 lanes. The Intel Core 7 251E is a 24-core, 32-thread desktop processor with a 65-watt TDP, Bartlett Lake architecture on 10 nm, DDR4 and DDR5 support, ECC capability, and PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes. The Intel part is built for throughput-heavy desktop workloads, while the AMD part is built for efficient mobile operation.

Buyers or system integrators with access to benchmark expectations for the Intel part should note that the database has no such data. The Intel processor's higher core count, larger cache, higher boost clock, and broader memory and PCIe support indicate a design aimed at heavy parallel workloads. The AMD processor's recorded scores indicate a capable low-power chip that matches enterprise server processors within 0.4% in aggregate average score, despite using only 4 cores.

The verdict from the data is straightforward: the AMD Ryzen 5 40 is the only processor with verified performance metrics, and it occupies the 70th percentile among all CPUs. The Intel Core 7 251E is a higher-specification part on paper, but its performance is unmeasured in this database. Selection between the two should be guided by the workload requirements and the platform constraints, not by benchmark comparisons, because the benchmark comparison is one-sided.