AMD Ryzen 5 7400F vs Intel Core i5-14400 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data for these two desktop processors reveals a surprisingly consistent pattern. The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F wins 11 of the 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core i5-14400 takes 6. But the margins tell a more nuanced story than the raw win count.

In the Cinebench suite, the AMD chip is uniformly ahead. The Ryzen 5 7400F scores 2193 in Cinebench R15 multi-core against 2148 for the Intel part, a 2.1% lead. Single-core in R15 goes to AMD as well, 309 versus 303, a 2% margin. The R20 results mirror this exactly: 9141 versus 8952 multi-core (2.1%) and 1290 versus 1263 single-core (2.1%). The R23 tests continue the trend, with the AMD part scoring 21765 versus 21315 multi-core and 3072 versus 3009 single-core, both again at 2.1%. Every Cinebench iteration, from R15 through R23, falls within a narrow 2% to 2.1% band favoring AMD. This consistency suggests a fundamental per-clock efficiency advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The Passmark suite splits more dramatically. The Intel Core i5-14400 wins the floating point math test decisively, scoring 61549 against 45799, a 25.6% advantage. Integer math also favors Intel at 82017 versus 74745, an 8.9% lead. Data compression goes to Intel at 314995 versus 289999, a 7.9% margin. Data encryption is essentially a tie, with Intel ahead by only 0.1% (16731 versus 16712). The single-thread Passmark test also goes to Intel, 3741 versus 3689, a 1.4% edge.

AMD's Passmark wins are equally lopsided in the opposite direction. The find prime numbers test is a blowout: 191 versus 80, a 138.8% advantage for the Ryzen 5 7400F. Physics simulation heavily favors AMD at 1660 versus 1396, an 18.9% lead. Extended instructions go to AMD at 21747 versus 19816, a 9.7% margin. Random string sorting favors AMD at 35096 versus 32346, an 8.5% edge. The Passmark multi-thread score goes to AMD at 25645 versus 25080, a 2.3% lead.

The overall picture is one of a near-tie in aggregate performance. The AMD part's average benchmark score sits at 32750, placing it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs. The Intel part averages 32115, the 82nd percentile. The nearest rivals for the AMD chip include the Intel Core i5-14600T at 32707 (0.1% behind) and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H at 32812 (0.2% ahead). The Intel chip's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-12800H at 32121 (a 0% delta) and the Intel Core i5-14450HX at 32040 (0.2% behind).

The Verdict

The data does not crown a single winner. Instead, it offers a split decision based on workload type. For rendering, physics simulation, prime-number computation, and most multi-threaded productivity tasks, the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F is the stronger choice. Its consistent 2.1% lead across all Cinebench versions and its 18.9% advantage in Passmark physics make it the pick for content creation and simulation workloads.

For floating point heavy applications, integer math, data compression, and single-thread responsiveness, the Intel Core i5-14400 holds the edge. The 25.6% floating point lead and 8.9% integer math advantage are substantial. Users running spreadsheet calculations, compression tools, or financial modeling may prefer the Intel part.

The Passmark single-thread score also favors Intel by 1.4%, which may translate to slightly snappier everyday responsiveness. However, the AMD part counters with a 2% to 2.1% single-core lead in every Cinebench test. The two chips trade blows depending on the benchmark methodology.

The Ryzen 5 7400F offers an unlocked multiplier, while the Core i5-14400 is locked. Enthusiasts who overclock will find the AMD part more flexible. The Intel part includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 730), while the AMD part has none. Buyers without a discrete GPU must factor that into their decision. The AMD chip supports only DDR5 memory, while the Intel chip supports both DDR4 and DDR5. System builders reusing older DDR4 memory can only do so with the Intel platform.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F uses the Zen 4 architecture on the Raphael codename, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core i5-14400 uses Raptor Lake architecture on the Raptor Lake-R codename, built on a 10 nm process at Intel. The transistor count reflects this: the AMD part packs 6,570 million transistors on a 71 mm² die, while the Intel part's die measures 215 mm².

The core configurations differ substantially. The AMD chip has 6 cores and 12 threads, all of them full-sized performance cores. The Intel chip has 10 cores and 16 threads, a hybrid arrangement that mixes performance and efficiency cores. The cache hierarchy reflects these different approaches. The AMD part provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3. The Intel part provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3. AMD's larger L3 cache likely contributes to its strong physics and prime-number results.

Memory support also diverges. The AMD chip supports DDR5 only with dual-channel memory and a recorded bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. The Intel chip supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory, though no bandwidth figure is recorded in the database. Both CPUs support ECC memory. The memory controller differences may explain why the Intel part wins in data compression, as DDR4 compatibility allows for different memory subsystem configurations.

PCI Express support varies as well. The AMD part offers Gen 5 with 24 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The AMD chip also carries an unlocked multiplier, whereas the Intel chip is locked. Integrated graphics are absent on the AMD part but present on the Intel part in the form of UHD Graphics 730.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show several clear differences between the two processors. The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core i5-14400 has 10 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks differ notably: the AMD chip runs at 3.70 GHz, the Intel chip at 2.50 GHz. Both boost to 4.70 GHz, an identical ceiling. The process node differs, with AMD at 5 nm and Intel at 10 nm. The AMD die measures 71 mm² versus 215 mm² for Intel.

L1 cache per core is 64 KB on AMD versus 80 KB on Intel. L2 per core is 1 MB on AMD versus 1.25 MB on Intel. L3 is 32 MB shared on AMD versus 20 MB shared on Intel. Memory support is DDR5 only for AMD versus DDR4 and DDR5 for Intel. Memory bandwidth is recorded at 83.2 GB/s for AMD, with no figure recorded for Intel. PCIe lanes are 24 for AMD versus 16 for Intel, both Gen 5. Integrated graphics: none on AMD, UHD Graphics 730 on Intel. The multiplier is unlocked on AMD and locked on Intel. The AMD chip lists a launch MSRP of $229, while the Intel chip lists $221. The AMD part number is 100-000001845; the Intel part number is SRN3QSRN46.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F scores 21765 against the Intel Core i5-14400's 21315, a 2.1% advantage for AMD.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-14400 beat the AMD chip in any major test?

A: Yes. Intel wins Passmark floating point math by 25.6% (61549 versus 45799), integer math by 8.9% (82017 versus 74745), data compression by 7.9% (314995 versus 289999), and single-thread Passmark by 1.4% (3741 versus 3689).

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400 has 10 cores and 16 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F and the Intel Core i5-14400 support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor includes integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Core i5-14400 includes integrated graphics, specifically UHD Graphics 730. The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F has no integrated graphics.

Q: What is the biggest single benchmark margin between the two?

A: The Passmark find prime numbers test shows the largest gap, with the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F scoring 191 versus 80 for the Intel chip, a 138.8% difference.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F is the choice for multi-threaded rendering workloads. Every Cinebench version, R15, R20, and R23, shows a 2.1% lead over the Intel part in multi-core. The Passmark multi-thread score confirms this at 2.3%. The physics test advantage of 18.9% makes the AMD chip suitable for simulation and physics-heavy applications. The prime number test result, a 138.8% lead, indicates strong integer workload performance in specific algorithmic contexts. The extended instructions advantage of 9.7% suggests better performance in vectorized and specialized instruction workloads. The random string sorting win of 8.5% points to advantages in data organization tasks. The AMD chip's unlocked multiplier also makes it the better starting point for overclocking-oriented builds.

The Intel Core i5-14400 is the choice for floating point intensive work. The 25.6% advantage in Passmark floating point math is the largest Intel win in the entire comparison. Integer math at 8.9% ahead makes it suitable for general computation. Data compression at 7.9% ahead favors archive management and file compression tasks. The data encryption result, though only 0.1% ahead, still goes to Intel. The Passmark single-thread score at 1.4% ahead suggests slightly better responsiveness in lightly threaded applications. The integrated UHD Graphics 730 means the Intel chip can power a display without a discrete GPU. The support for both DDR4 and DDR5 memory gives system builders flexibility in memory selection. The 10-core, 16-thread configuration provides more physical cores, which may benefit certain parallel workloads despite the AMD chip's per-core efficiency.

For buyers choosing between the two, the decision hinges on the primary workload. Rendering and physics favor AMD. Floating point math and compression favor Intel. The overall benchmark averages are close, with the AMD chip at 32750 and the Intel chip at 32115, a difference of roughly 2%. Both sit near the 82nd and 83rd percentiles of all CPUs, respectively. The data shows two well-matched processors with complementary strengths rather than a clear overall victor.