AMD Ryzen 5 7400 vs AMD Ryzen 7 170 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct benchmark comparison between the AMD Ryzen 7 170 and the AMD Ryzen 5 7400 shows a split decision, with the desktop Ryzen 5 taking 7 of the 11 recorded tests. The Ryzen 7 170, however, claims the four most decisive victories, often by wide margins. The largest gap in either direction belongs to the Ryzen 7 170 in integer math, where it scores 79,738 against 64,733 for the Ryzen 5 7400, a 23.2% advantage. That result reflects the extra two cores and four threads of the mobile part, and it sets the tone for the Ryzen 7 170's wins in compute-heavy workloads.

The Ryzen 7 170 also leads in floating-point math, posting 44,979 versus 40,784, a 10.3% edge. Data encryption shows a similar pattern: 16,078 for the Ryzen 7 170 versus 14,865 for the Ryzen 5 7400, an 8.2% lead. In data compression, the Ryzen 7 170 edges ahead with 265,920 against 261,749, a narrower 1.6% margin, suggesting that the extra threads help but do not dominate this particular workload.

The Ryzen 5 7400 answers with a set of wins that highlight its newer architecture and higher single-core clock. The most striking result is in find prime numbers, where the Ryzen 5 7400 scores 79 against just 49 for the Ryzen 7 170, a 38% swing. That test is highly sensitive to per-core efficiency and clock speed, and the Ryzen 5 7400's 4.30 GHz boost clock versus 4.75 GHz on the Ryzen 7 170 does not fully explain the gap; the Zen 4 core design clearly matters here. Extended instructions also favor the Ryzen 5 7400, with 19,924 versus 18,107, a 9.1% advantage, indicating better handling of AVX-style workloads.

In multithread performance, the Ryzen 5 7400 takes a 21,712 to 20,760 win, a 4.4% margin, despite having fewer cores. This is a notable outcome: the 12-thread desktop part outruns the 16-thread mobile part in a test that should theoretically favor the latter. The physics test shows an even larger gap, with the Ryzen 5 7400 scoring 1,150 against 890, a 22.6% lead. Random string sorting also goes to the Ryzen 5 7400, 31,110 versus 27,804, a 10.6% edge. Single-thread performance, measured twice in the database, favors the Ryzen 5 7400 with 3,248 points versus 3,128, a 3.7% lead.

The overall average benchmark scores reflect these mixed results: the Ryzen 7 170 sits at 43,689, while the Ryzen 5 7400 averages 42,055. Both chips land in the 88th percentile of all CPUs in the database, meaning they occupy the same performance tier despite the divergent workload results. The nearest rivals for the Ryzen 7 170 include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 7745 at 43,704 (delta 0%), the AMD Ryzen 7 260 at 43,717 (delta -0.1%), and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465 at 43,431 (delta 0.6%). The Ryzen 5 7400's closest competitors include the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 8945HS at 41,963 (delta 0.2%), the Intel Core i7-14700T at 41,914 (delta 0.3%), and the Intel Core i9-12900K at 42,335 (delta -0.7%).

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most benchmark tests in the database?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7400 wins 7 of the 11 recorded head-to-head tests, while the AMD Ryzen 7 170 wins 4. The Ryzen 5 7400's wins include multithread, physics, single-thread, extended instructions, find prime numbers, and random string sorting.

Q: How large is the Ryzen 7 170's lead in integer math?

A: The Ryzen 7 170 scores 79,738 in integer math versus 64,733 for the Ryzen 5 7400, a 23.2% advantage. This is the largest single-test margin in the entire comparison.

Q: Does the Ryzen 5 7400 outperform the Ryzen 7 170 in any compute-heavy workload?

A: Yes. The Ryzen 5 7400 leads in multithread performance with 21,712 versus 20,760, a 4.4% edge, despite having 6 cores and 12 threads versus 8 cores and 16 threads on the Ryzen 7 170.

Q: What is the difference in single-thread scores?

A: The Ryzen 5 7400 scores 3,248 in single-thread tests, while the Ryzen 7 170 scores 3,128, giving the Ryzen 5 7400 a 3.7% advantage. This appears twice in the database under slightly different test names, with identical results.

Q: How do the two processors compare in data encryption?

A: The Ryzen 7 170 leads with 16,078 points versus 14,865 for the Ryzen 5 7400, an 8.2% advantage. This is one of the Ryzen 7 170's clearer wins, along with floating-point math and data compression.

Q: Are both processors in the same performance percentile overall?

A: Yes, both the Ryzen 7 170 and the Ryzen 5 7400 rank in the 88th percentile of all CPUs in the database. Their average benchmark scores are close, with the Ryzen 7 170 at 43,689 and the Ryzen 5 7400 at 42,055.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different AMD architecture families and target different market segments. The Ryzen 7 170 uses the Zen 3+ architecture under the codename Rembrandt-R, built on a 6 nm process at TSMC. Its die size is listed at 210 mm². The Ryzen 5 7400, by contrast, uses the newer Zen 4 architecture with the codename Raphael, manufactured on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC, with a die size of 71 mm² and a transistor count of 6,570 million.

Cache layouts differ in one key area. Both chips share 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The L2 cache, however, is larger on the Ryzen 5 7400: 1 MB per core versus 512 KB per core on the Ryzen 7 170. This means the Ryzen 5 7400 has a total of 6 MB of L2 across its six cores, while the Ryzen 7 170 has 4 MB across its eight cores. The larger per-core L2 likely contributes to the Ryzen 5 7400's wins in latency-sensitive tests like find prime numbers and random string sorting.

The integrated graphics also differ. The Ryzen 7 170 includes a Radeon 680M, while the Ryzen 5 7400 includes a more generically labeled Radeon Graphics. Neither chip has a 3D V-Cache option in the recorded data. The memory support is identical in type: both use DDR5 with dual-channel memory buses. However, the memory bandwidth figures differ: the Ryzen 7 170 lists 76.8 GB/s, while the Ryzen 5 7400 lists 83.2 GB/s, a 6.4 GB/s gap in favor of the desktop part.

PCIe connectivity also diverges. The Ryzen 7 170 provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU, while the Ryzen 5 7400 provides Gen 5 with 24 lanes. This makes the Ryzen 5 7400 more future-proof for high-bandwidth expansion, though the Ryzen 7 170's mobile socket limits practical expansion options regardless. The Ryzen 7 170 uses AMD Socket FP7, indicating a mobile platform, while the Ryzen 5 7400 uses AMD Socket AM5, the standard desktop socket. The multiplier is locked on the Ryzen 7 170 but unlocked on the Ryzen 5 7400, meaning the desktop chip supports user overclocking while the mobile chip does not.

The production status for both is listed as active. Release dates are close: the Ryzen 7 170 launched on September 30, 2025, and the Ryzen 5 7400 launched on September 15, 2025.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts are the most obvious specification split. The Ryzen 7 170 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Ryzen 5 7400 has 6 cores and 12 threads. Clock speeds favor the Ryzen 5 7400 in base frequency: 3.30 GHz versus 3.20 GHz. The boost clock, however, favors the Ryzen 7 170 significantly: 4.75 GHz versus 4.30 GHz, a 0.45 GHz advantage.

Thermal design power differs substantially. The Ryzen 7 170 is rated at 35 W TDP, while the Ryzen 5 7400 is rated at 65 W. The power envelope difference reflects their market segments: the Ryzen 7 170 is a mobile processor designed for laptops, while the Ryzen 5 7400 is a desktop processor with more thermal headroom.

The process node and die size differ as noted above: 6 nm and 210 mm² for the Ryzen 7 170, versus 5 nm and 71 mm² for the Ryzen 5 7400. The transistor count is only listed for the Ryzen 5 7400 at 6,570 million. Memory bandwidth differs, with the Ryzen 5 7400 at 83.2 GB/s and the Ryzen 7 170 at 76.8 GB/s. PCIe generation and lane counts also differ: Gen 4 with 20 lanes for the Ryzen 7 170, Gen 5 with 24 lanes for the Ryzen 5 7400.

The socket and market segment are direct opposites: AMD Socket FP7 and Mobile for the Ryzen 7 170, AMD Socket AM5 and Desktop for the Ryzen 5 7400. The multiplier unlock status differs, as does the integrated GPU naming. The part numbers are distinct: 100-000000989 for the Ryzen 7 170 and 100-000001900 for the Ryzen 5 7400. Neither processor has a launch MSRP listed in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 7 170 is the better choice for workloads that scale with core count and thread count. Its 23.2% lead in integer math and 10.3% lead in floating-point math make it the stronger option for general computational tasks such as compilation, scientific simulation, or heavy spreadsheet analytics. The 8.2% advantage in data encryption points to suitability for encryption-heavy tasks, including VPN processing, secure file storage, or database encryption. The 1.6% win in data compression rounds out its profile: it is not a dominant lead, but it is a consistent one. For users running parallel integer workloads or any task that can use all 16 threads effectively, the Ryzen 7 170 delivers measurable gains.

The Ryzen 5 7400 wins in scenarios where per-core efficiency and newer instruction handling matter more than raw thread count. Its 38% advantage in find prime numbers is the standout result, indicating strong single-core integer performance that benefits prime-number generation, certain cryptography primitives, and similar algorithms. The 9.1% lead in extended instructions suggests better AVX-512 or similar extended instruction set performance, which matters for scientific computing and media encoding. The 22.6% lead in physics is significant for gaming or simulation workloads that rely on physics calculations. The 10.6% win in random string sorting points to advantages in data processing tasks that involve sorting or hashing large datasets.

The multithread result is the most interesting. The Ryzen 5 7400 beats the Ryzen 7 170 by 4.4% in the multithread test, despite having 4 fewer threads. This suggests that the Zen 4 architecture and the larger L2 cache per core compensate for the thread deficit in this particular benchmark. Users who prioritize single-thread responsiveness, gaming, or lightly threaded applications will find the Ryzen 5 7400's 3.7% single-thread lead meaningful. The same applies to workloads that rely on the physics engine or extended instruction sets.

In practical terms, the Ryzen 7 170 suits mobile users who need a power-efficient processor with strong multi-core throughput for content creation, virtualization, or development work. Its 35 W TDP makes it viable for thin-and-light laptops that still need serious compute. The Ryzen 5 7400 suits desktop users who want a balanced processor with a higher base clock, a larger L2 cache, and the ability to overclock thanks to its unlocked multiplier. Its 65 W TDP and AM5 socket allow for robust cooling and future upgrades. The choice comes down to whether the workload rewards thread count or per-core efficiency; the benchmark data shows both processors excel in their respective domains.