AMD Ryzen 5 4680U vs Intel Core i5-8600 Comparison

The Intel Core i5-8600 and AMD Ryzen 5 4680U represent two very different philosophies in processor design: a 65W desktop part from 2018 built on Intel’s 14nm process, and a 15W mobile chip from 2021 built on TSMC’s 7nm node. Benchmark data shows a split decision, with the AMD part winning older Cinebench R15 workloads by significant margins, while the Intel chip takes the newer Cinebench R23 tests. Both processors land at the 48th percentile among all CPUs, with the i5-8600 posting an average benchmark score of 2454 against the Ryzen 5 4680U’s 2424.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 4680U has 12 threads thanks to simultaneous multithreading, while the Intel Core i5-8600 has 6 threads across its 6 cores.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap in the head-to-head results?

A: The largest delta is in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the AMD Ryzen 5 4680U scores 1291 against the Intel Core i5-8600’s 855, a 33.8% advantage for AMD.

Q: Does the Intel chip win any benchmark?

A: Yes. The Intel Core i5-8600 wins Cinebench R23 multi-core with 8486 versus 7073 for AMD, a 20% lead, and also edges out the Ryzen in R23 single-core by 3% (1198 vs 1163).

Q: Are these chips still in production?

A: Both processors are end-of-life. The Intel Core i5-8600 was released on 2018-02-13, while the AMD Ryzen 5 4680U launched later on 2021-04-12.

Q: What is the market segment for each processor?

A: The Intel Core i5-8600 is a desktop part using Socket 1151, while the AMD Ryzen 5 4680U is a mobile processor on Socket FP6.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel chip has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 2454 versus 2424 for the AMD part, a difference of about 1.2% in favor of Intel.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge sharply in their underlying design. The Intel Core i5-8600 uses the Coffee Lake architecture on a 14nm process node fabricated by Intel, with a die size of 154 mm². The AMD Ryzen 5 4680U is built on Zen 2 architecture codenamed Renoir, manufactured by TSMC on a 7nm process, with a die size of 156 mm² and a transistor count of 9,800 million. The process node difference is significant: AMD’s 7nm is two full generations ahead of Intel’s 14nm in terms of lithography.

Cache configurations also differ. Both share 64 KB of L1 cache per core, but the Intel chip has 256 KB of L2 per core versus 512 KB per core on the AMD part. The L3 cache is slightly larger on Intel at 9 MB shared, compared to 8 MB shared on AMD. The AMD processor compensates with 12 threads versus 6, leveraging simultaneous multithreading to extract more work from each core.

The platform differences are substantial. The Intel Core i5-8600 supports DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus and a peak memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, while the AMD Ryzen 5 4680U supports LPDDR4 with a lower bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. The integrated graphics differ as well: Intel uses UHD Graphics 630, while AMD pairs the CPU with Radeon Graphics featuring 448 shader processors. Neither chip supports ECC memory, and both are locked (multiplier not unlocked).

The power envelope tells a stark story: the Intel part has a 65W TDP, while the AMD mobile chip is rated at just 15W. That 50W difference explains why the Ryzen 5 4680U can be placed in thin-and-light laptops while the Core i5-8600 requires a desktop cooling solution. The PCIe implementation also differs: Intel offers PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while AMD lists PCIe Gen 3 without specifying lane count.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results reveal a generational shift in workload behavior. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen 5 4680U delivers 1291 points against the Intel Core i5-8600’s 855, a 33.8% advantage. This is a massive win for the AMD chip, likely driven by its 12 threads allowing better utilization of the older renderer’s parallel workload. The single-core R15 test shows a similar pattern: AMD scores 170 versus Intel’s 120, a 29.4% margin. These results suggest that in legacy applications, the Ryzen 5 4680U’s Zen 2 architecture provides substantially higher instructions-per-clock efficiency.

The story flips in Cinebench R23, which uses a newer rendering engine. The Intel Core i5-8600 scores 8486 in multi-core, defeating the AMD part’s 7073 by 20%. This reversal is striking: the desktop chip’s higher sustained clock speeds and 65W power budget appear to matter more in this workload. The R23 single-core result is closer, with Intel taking 1198 versus AMD’s 1163, a 3% margin. That narrow lead indicates that the architectural efficiency gap has narrowed in newer software, with the Intel chip’s 4.30 GHz boost clock edging out the AMD part’s 4.00 GHz.

The wins are split evenly: two benchmarks for each processor. However, the magnitude of the wins is asymmetric. AMD’s R15 victories are massive, with deltas of 33.8% and 29.4%, while Intel’s R23 wins are smaller at 20% and 3%. This pattern suggests the AMD chip is particularly strong in older, thread-hungry workloads, while the Intel part holds advantages in modern, clock-sensitive rendering tasks.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every fundamental specification except core count. Both have 6 physical cores, but the AMD Ryzen 5 4680U doubles the thread count to 12 through SMT. Base clocks are 3.10 GHz for Intel versus 2.20 GHz for AMD, while boost clocks are 4.30 GHz versus 4.00 GHz respectively. The TDP difference is the most dramatic: 65W for Intel, 15W for AMD.

The process node and foundry are entirely different: Intel uses its own 14nm process, while AMD uses TSMC’s 7nm node. The AMD chip has 9,800 million transistors on a 156 mm² die, while the Intel die is 154 mm² with no transistor count listed. L2 cache differs at 256 KB per core versus 512 KB per core, while L3 is 9 MB shared on Intel versus 8 MB shared on AMD.

Memory support diverges: Intel supports DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth, while AMD supports LPDDR4 with 34.1 GB/s. The sockets are incompatible (Intel Socket 1151 vs AMD Socket FP6), and the market segments are different (Desktop vs Mobile). Integrated graphics are also distinct: UHD Graphics 630 versus Radeon Graphics 448SP. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $213; the AMD part has no listed launch MSRP. The release dates are separated by over three years, with Intel launching on 2018-02-13 and AMD on 2021-04-12.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-8600 is the better choice for modern rendering workloads. Its 20% win in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 3% win in R23 single-core indicate that it handles current-generation software more effectively. The higher boost clock of 4.30 GHz and 65W power budget give it sustained performance headroom that the 15W AMD part cannot match under heavy load. For desktop users with access to Socket 1151 motherboards and DDR4 memory, this chip offers a path to 9 MB of shared L3 cache and a 42.7 GB/s memory bandwidth. The PCIe Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes also provides more expansion capability for dedicated GPUs.

The AMD Ryzen 5 4680U dominates in legacy and multi-threaded applications. Its 33.8% lead in Cinebench R15 multi-core and 29.4% lead in R15 single-core show that older software runs dramatically faster on the Zen 2 architecture. The 12 threads give it a decisive edge in workloads that scale well with concurrent execution, even at a much lower 15W TDP. For mobile users, the 7nm process from TSMC and 9,800 million transistors pack considerable compute into a power-efficient package. The 512 KB L2 per core and Radeon Graphics 448SP make it a compelling option for thin laptops that need solid integrated graphics.

The data suggests a clear use-case split. The Intel Core i5-8600 is the pick for desktop systems running current rendering engines, where its clock speed and power budget translate directly into higher R23 scores. The AMD Ryzen 5 4680U is the pick for portable systems running a mix of older and modern applications, where its thread count and architectural efficiency deliver outsized gains in R15 benchmarks while sipping power. The 48th percentile ranking for both chips places them in the mid-range of all CPUs, but their strengths are in different arenas. Benchmark results indicate that buyers should choose based on the software they run, not on raw averages.