AMD Ryzen 5 7400 vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7400 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has 24 cores and 24 threads.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 boosts to 5.60 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7400 boosts to 4.30 GHz.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen 5 7400 and the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 support ECC memory.

Q: What is the L3 cache capacity on each chip?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7400 has 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has 36 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which chip has the higher single-thread benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 scores 4881 in the PassMark single-thread test, compared to 3248 for the AMD Ryzen 5 7400, a difference of 33.5%.

Q: How do the two processors compare in overall benchmark percentile?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 sits at the 95th percentile of all CPUs, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7400 sits at the 88th percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies and manufacturing nodes. The AMD Ryzen 5 7400 uses the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Raphael, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 uses the Arrow Lake architecture, specifically Arrow Lake-S, built on a 3 nm process, also at TSMC. The smaller process node gives Intel a transistor density advantage that shows up in the component counts: the Intel chip integrates 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, while the AMD chip uses 6,570 million transistors on a much smaller 71 mm² die.

Core organization differs sharply. The Ryzen 5 7400 is a 6-core, 12-thread part, meaning each core can handle two threads simultaneously. The Core Ultra 9 285 is a 24-core, 24-thread part with no simultaneous multithreading, relying instead on a high core count to drive throughput. Per-core cache allocations also diverge: the AMD chip carries 64 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core, while the Intel chip carries 192 KB of L1 and 3 MB of L2 per core. Shared L3 cache favors Intel as well, 36 MB versus 16 MB.

Memory bandwidth is another point of separation. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 reaches 102.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7400 records 83.2 GB/s. Both use dual-channel DDR5 memory. PCIe lane counts differ modestly: AMD provides Gen 5 with 24 CPU lanes, while Intel provides Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes.

The integrated graphics solutions are not equivalent. AMD pairs the Ryzen 5 7400 with Radeon Graphics, while Intel uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. Socket requirements also split the field: AMD uses Socket AM5, Intel uses Socket 1851. The AMD part has an unlocked multiplier, enabling overclocking, while the Intel part is locked. Production status is active for both, with the AMD chip released on 2025-09-15 and the Intel chip released on 2024-12-31.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data shows a complete sweep for the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 across all eleven shared PassMark tests. The largest margin appears in passmark_find_prime_numbers, where Intel scores 459 against AMD's 79, a delta of 82.8%. This is an extreme outlier in the data, indicating a workload where the Intel architecture is overwhelmingly dominant.

Floating-point math also heavily favors Intel. The Core Ultra 9 285 records 194988 in passmark_floating_point_math versus 40784 for the Ryzen 5 7400, a 79.1% gap. Physics simulation shows a similar pattern: Intel scores 3598, AMD scores 1150, a 68% difference. Data encryption favors Intel by 68.3%, with scores of 46949 and 14865 respectively.

The integer math test delivers a 60.7% win for Intel, 164869 versus 64733. Multithread performance, a key indicator for heavily threaded workloads, shows Intel ahead by 61.6%, scoring 56602 against 21712. Random string sorting goes to Intel by 57.8%, 73651 versus 31110. Data compression shows a 56.5% Intel advantage, 602121 versus 261749. Extended instructions favor Intel by 56.1%, 45357 versus 19924.

The narrowest gap in the entire comparison is in single-thread performance. The Intel chip scores 4881 in passmark_single_thread, while the AMD chip scores 3248, a 33.5% difference. Although this is the smallest delta in the dataset, it is still a substantial single-thread lead. The average benchmark score reinforces the overall picture: Intel averages 75488, AMD averages 42055. Intel's nearest rivals in the database include AMD EPYC 8224P at 75582 (delta -0.1%), AMD EPYC 4545P at 75373 (delta 0.2%), and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D at 75716 (delta -0.3%). AMD's nearest rivals include Intel Core i9-12900K at 42335 (delta -0.7%) and Intel Core i7-14700T at 41914 (delta 0.3%).

Specification Differences

The specification table separates the two chips across nearly every major category. Core count differs by 18 cores: 6 for AMD, 24 for Intel. Thread count differs by 12 threads: 12 for AMD, 24 for Intel. Base clocks are close but not identical: 3.30 GHz for AMD, 2.50 GHz for Intel. Boost clocks show a larger gap: 4.30 GHz for AMD, 5.60 GHz for Intel.

The process node is 5 nm for AMD and 3 nm for Intel. Transistor counts are 6,570 million versus 17,800 million, and die sizes are 71 mm² versus 243 mm². L1 cache per core is 64 KB for AMD and 192 KB for Intel. L2 cache per core is 1 MB for AMD and 3 MB for Intel. Shared L3 cache is 16 MB for AMD and 36 MB for Intel.

Memory bandwidth is 83.2 GB/s for AMD and 102.4 GB/s for Intel. PCIe lane counts are 24 for AMD and 20 for Intel, both Gen 5. The integrated GPU differs: Radeon Graphics on AMD, Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU on Intel. The AMD multiplier is unlocked; the Intel multiplier is locked. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $579; no launch MSRP is recorded for the AMD part. Release dates differ, with AMD launching on 2025-09-15 and Intel launching on 2024-12-31.

The Verdict

The data presents an unambiguous performance hierarchy. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 wins every head-to-head benchmark in the database, with margins ranging from 33.5% in single-thread to 82.8% in prime number finding. The average benchmark score for Intel is 75488, which is 79.5% higher than AMD's 42055. The percentile ranking confirms the separation: Intel sits at the 95th percentile of all CPUs, while AMD sits at the 88th percentile.

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400 is not positioned as a direct competitor to the Core Ultra 9 285. Its nearest rivals are mid-range and previous-generation parts like the Intel Core i9-12900K and Intel Core i7-14700T, with average scores in the 41779 to 42335 range. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285, by contrast, competes with server-class parts like the AMD EPYC 8224P and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D. The database indicates that these two chips occupy different tiers of the desktop market, despite both being active production parts.

Users who require maximum multi-threaded throughput, heavy math workloads, or high single-thread responsiveness should look to the Intel part based on the recorded scores. Users constrained to a 6-core, 12-thread platform with a smaller cache footprint and lower memory bandwidth should recognize that the AMD part delivers significantly lower scores across all measured workloads. The 65 W TDP is identical for both chips, so power draw at the package level does not explain the performance disparity.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 wins in every measured category, but the magnitude of the win varies by workload type. The largest advantages appear in prime number finding (82.8%), floating-point math (79.1%), and physics simulation (68%). These are compute-heavy, multi-threaded workloads where the 24-core configuration provides a decisive edge. Data encryption (68.3%), integer math (60.7%), and multithread performance (61.6%) also show strong Intel dominance. Compression (56.5%), random string sorting (57.8%), and extended instructions (56.1%) round out the mid-range margins.

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400 does not claim a single benchmark win in the dataset. Its closest relative performance is in single-thread work, where the Intel advantage narrows to 33.5%. Even in that category, the Intel chip's 4881 score comfortably exceeds AMD's 3248. The AMD part's profile suggests it is intended for lighter desktop workloads, but the recorded data does not show any scenario where it outpaces the Core Ultra 9 285.

For workloads that depend on memory bandwidth, the Intel chip's 102.4 GB/s versus AMD's 83.2 GB/s gives it a structural advantage that appears throughout the benchmark results. For workloads that depend on cache capacity, Intel's 36 MB of L3 versus AMD's 16 MB provides additional headroom. The AMD chip does offer more PCIe lanes (24 versus 20), which could matter for expansion-heavy configurations, but this does not translate into any benchmark advantage in the recorded tests. The unlocked multiplier on the AMD part enables overclocking, though the database does not include overclocked benchmark results to quantify that potential.