AMD Ryzen 5 7400F vs AMD Ryzen 7 8700G Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 7 8700G and AMD Ryzen 5 7400F are both desktop processors on the AMD Socket AM5 platform, but they target different build philosophies. The 8700G is an 8-core, 16-thread Zen 4 (Phoenix) chip with a 4 nm process and integrated Radeon 780M graphics, while the 7400F is a 6-core, 12-thread Zen 4 (Raphael) chip on a 5 nm process with no integrated graphics. Benchmark data shows the 8700G wins 10 of 15 head-to-head tests, but the 7400F takes decisive victories in several multi-core and single-core workloads. The choice comes down to whether you need the iGPU and broader computational throughput or prefer the higher clock speeds and larger L3 cache for specific tasks.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8700G has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What are the base and boost clock differences?

A: The 8700G runs at a 4.20 GHz base clock and 5.10 GHz boost clock. The 7400F has a 3.70 GHz base clock and a 4.70 GHz boost clock.

Q: Which CPU has integrated graphics, and which does not?

A: The 8700G includes Radeon 780M integrated graphics. The 7400F has no integrated graphics (listed as "N/A").

Q: How do their L3 cache sizes differ?

A: The 8700G has 16 MB of shared L3 cache, while the 7400F has 32 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What is the process node and die size for each?

A: The 8700G is built on a 4 nm process with a 178 mm² die size. The 7400F uses a 5 nm process with a 71 mm² die size.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The 8700G has an average benchmark score of 33089, slightly ahead of the 7400F's 32750. Both sit at the 83rd percentile vs all CPUs.

Architecture Differences

The two chips share the Zen 4 architecture and the AMD Socket AM5, but they diverge significantly in their physical design and feature set. The 8700G, codenamed Phoenix, is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC and packs 25,000 million transistors into a 178 mm² die. The 7400F, codenamed Raphael, uses a 5 nm process with 6,570 million transistors on a much smaller 71 mm² die. This difference in node and transistor count explains why the 8700G can integrate Radeon 780M graphics while the 7400F has no iGPU at all.

The 8700G features 8 cores and 16 threads with a 16 MB shared L3 cache, whereas the 7400F has 6 cores and 12 threads but doubles the L3 cache to 32 MB shared. Both have 64 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 per core. The 7400F compensates for fewer cores with a larger cache pool, which benefits certain workloads. The 8700G has a higher base clock (4.20 GHz vs 3.70 GHz) and boost clock (5.10 GHz vs 4.70 GHz), but the 7400F shows a higher single-core score in Cinebench R23 (3072 vs 1817), suggesting the smaller die and different power delivery allow it to sustain higher single-thread performance.

Memory support is identical: both support DDR5 with dual-channel memory and 83.2 GB/s bandwidth. However, the 7400F supports ECC memory while the 8700G does not. PCIe connectivity also differs: the 8700G offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the 7400F provides Gen 5 with 24 lanes (CPU only). Both processors are unlocked for overclocking, but the 8700G was released on 2024-01-07, a year before the 7400F on 2025-01-08.

The Verdict

The data suggests the Ryzen 7 8700G is the better all-rounder for most builders. It wins 10 of 15 head-to-head benchmarks, with significant margins in integer math (37.9% ahead), floating-point math (39.3% ahead), and data encryption (36.7% ahead). Its integrated Radeon 780M graphics make it a viable option for a system without a discrete GPU, which is a major advantage for compact or budget-conscious builds where a separate graphics card isn't needed. The 8700G also leads in passmark single-thread (3928 vs 3689, a 6.5% margin), so it's not sacrificing everyday responsiveness.

The Ryzen 5 7400F, however, is the pick if you prioritize raw multi-core rendering or single-core speed in specific applications. It crushes the 8700G in Cinebench R23 multicore (21765 vs 17128, a 21.3% lead) and singlecore (3072 vs 1817, a 40.9% lead), and it wins in passmark find prime numbers (191 vs 103, a 46.1% margin). Its larger 32 MB L3 cache and smaller die likely contribute to these wins. If you're building a dedicated gaming or workstation rig with a discrete GPU and don't care about integrated graphics, the 7400F's benchmark profile is compelling.

For a general-purpose desktop that can handle a wide mix of tasks without a GPU, choose the 8700G. For a system where you'll pair it with a dedicated graphics card and want maximum performance in Cinebench-style workloads, the 7400F is the data-backed choice.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 7 8700G | AMD Ryzen 5 7400F |

|----------------|-------------------|-------------------|

| Cores | 8 | 6 |

| Threads | 16 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 4.20 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.10 GHz | 4.70 GHz |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 25,000 million | 6,570 million |

| Die Size | 178 mm² | 71 mm² |

| L3 Cache | 16 MB (shared) | 32 MB (shared) |

| ECC Memory | false | true |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 24 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 780M | N/A |

| Release Date | 2024-01-07 | 2025-01-08 |

| Launch MSRP | $329 | $229 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The biggest win for the 8700G comes in passmark floating point math, where it scores 63815 against the 7400F's 45799, a 39.3% advantage. Integer math follows closely at 37.9% ahead (103107 vs 74745). Data encryption shows a 36.7% lead (22842 vs 16712), and extended instructions are 33.7% better (29067 vs 21747). Data compression is also a strong point, with the 8700G at 386811 versus 289999, a 33.4% margin. The 8700G wins passmark multithread by 23.6% (31690 vs 25645) and random string sorting by 31.1% (46025 vs 35096). In Cinebench R15 multicore, the 8700G takes it at 2693 vs 2193, a 22.8% win. Passmark single-thread goes to the 8700G at 3928 vs 3689, a 6.5% lead.

The 7400F's most dramatic victory is in passmark find prime numbers, where it scores 191 versus the 8700G's 103, a 46.1% margin. Cinebench R23 singlecore shows a 40.9% lead (3072 vs 1817), and Cinebench R23 multicore is 21.3% ahead (21765 vs 17128). The 7400F also wins Cinebench R15 singlecore by 7.4% (309 vs 286) and passmark physics by 0.8% (1660 vs 1647). These wins are concentrated in tests that favor the 7400F's larger L3 cache and higher effective single-thread throughput.

Where Each One Wins

The 8700G dominates in computational throughput tasks that benefit from more cores and higher thread counts. It wins all four passmark math and data-processing tests (integer, floating point, encryption, compression) with margins ranging from 33.4% to 39.3%. It also leads in extended instructions and random string sorting, making it the better choice for general productivity, database work, and any workload that uses AVX or similar instruction sets. The 8700G's passmark multithread win (31690 vs 25645) confirms its advantage in multi-threaded applications like video encoding or software compilation. Its integrated Radeon 780M graphics also mean it can handle light gaming or media tasks without a discrete GPU.

The 7400F wins in specific single-thread and cache-sensitive scenarios. Its 46.1% lead in find prime numbers suggests a strong integer-heavy single-thread performance. The Cinebench R23 singlecore margin of 40.9% is notable, indicating that applications relying on a single core — like older games or certain legacy software — will perform significantly better on this chip. The Cinebench R23 multicore win (21.3%) is surprising given fewer cores, but the larger 32 MB L3 cache likely helps in rendering workloads that reuse data. The 7400F also edges out in physics simulation by a hair (0.8%), making it a minor but real win for physics-based applications. For a build with a dedicated GPU, the 7400F's profile suggests it's the stronger performer in gaming and rendering scenarios that don't utilize the 8700G's extra cores.