AMD Ryzen 5 7400F vs Intel Core i7-13705H Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F wins this matchup decisively: it takes 14 of 17 recorded benchmarks against the Intel Core i7-13705H, including a clean sweep of every Cinebench rendering test by exactly 36 percent. The Intel chip's three wins are real but narrow in scope, confined to floating point math, integer math, and physics. What makes the result striking is that the Ryzen 5 7400F achieves it with 6 cores and 12 threads against a processor carrying 14 cores and 20 threads, a discrepancy explained by the desktop part's higher clocks, newer process node, and fundamentally different power envelope.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite is where the gap is widest and most consistent. In Cinebench R15, the Ryzen 5 7400F scores 2193 multi-core and 309 single-core against the Core i7-13705H's 1612 and 227, margins of 36 and 36.1 percent respectively. Cinebench R20 repeats the pattern almost exactly: 9141 versus 6719 multi-core (36 percent) and 1290 versus 948 single-core (36.1 percent). Cinebench R23 lands on the same numbers, with the AMD part at 21765 versus 15998 in multi-core and 3072 versus 2258 in single-core, both 36 percent apart. Rendering is a total rout in AMD's favor at both ends of the workload spectrum.

The Passmark results are more mixed. The Ryzen 5 7400F wins Passmark single-thread 3689 to 3483, a 5.9 percent edge that mirrors its single-core Cinebench dominance. It also takes the overall Passmark multithread rating, 25645 to 24460 (4.8 percent), despite having eight fewer cores. Data compression goes to AMD 289999 to 273720 (5.9 percent), data encryption 16712 to 16324 (2.4 percent), and random string sorting 35096 to 29285 (19.8 percent). The extended instructions test is another blowout: 21747 versus 15810, a 37.6 percent AMD win. The most lopsided result of the entire dataset is Passmark's find prime numbers, where the Ryzen scores 191 against Intel's 116, a 64.7 percent advantage.

Intel's three wins cluster in specific computational kernels. Floating point math goes to the Core i7-13705H at 63064 versus 45799, a 27.4 percent lead. Integer math also favors Intel, 85927 to 74745 (13 percent). Physics is the closest Intel victory, 1854 to 1660 (10.5 percent). These wins suggest the Raptor Lake part's hybrid core count pays off in workloads that scale across many threads and favor certain arithmetic paths, but they are outnumbered by AMD's victories everywhere else.

In context, the two chips sit in nearly the same overall neighborhood. The Ryzen 5 7400F's average benchmark score is 32750 against 32697 for the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H, 32707 for the Intel Core i5-14600T, 32812 for the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H, and 32662 for the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360, placing it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Core i7-13705H averages 32076, with rivals including the Intel Core i5-14450HX at 32040, the Intel Core i5-14400 at 32115, the Intel Core i7-12800H at 32121, and the Intel Core i9-11900 at 32226, putting it in the 82nd percentile. The percentile gap of one point understates how differently the two chips distribute their strengths.

Architecture Differences

These processors come from opposite sides of the market. The Ryzen 5 7400F is a desktop chip on the AMD Socket AM5 platform, built on TSMC's 5 nm process with the Zen 4 (Raphael) architecture. It packs 6 cores and 12 threads, a 3.70 GHz base clock, and a 4.70 GHz boost clock, with a 65 W TDP. Its die measures 71 mm² and contains 6,570 million transistors. Cache allocation is generous per core: 64 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core, plus 32 MB of shared L3.

The Core i7-13705H is a mobile processor soldered to Intel BGA 1744, using the Raptor Lake-H architecture on Intel's 10 nm process. It fields 14 cores and 20 threads, but at lower clocks: 2.40 GHz base and 5.00 GHz boost. Its TDP is 45 W, considerably lower than the AMD part's, reflecting its laptop-first design. The die is much larger at 257 mm². Each core carries 80 KB of L1 and 2 MB of L2, with 24 MB of shared L3, so Intel wins per-core L1 and L2 while AMD wins total L3.

Platform features diverge sharply. The Ryzen supports only DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus with 83.2 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Intel chip accepts either DDR4 or DDR5, also dual-channel. The AMD part offers ECC memory support; the Intel part does not. PCIe is a major AMD advantage: 24 CPU-only Gen 5 lanes versus 8 CPU-only Gen 5 lanes on Intel. On the other hand, the Core i7-13705H integrates Iris Xe Graphics 96EU, while the Ryzen 5 7400F has no integrated graphics at all and requires a discrete card. The AMD chip ships with an unlocked multiplier for overclocking; the Intel chip is locked. The Ryzen 5 7400F launched later, with a launch MSRP of $229, while the Core i7-13705H carries a launch MSRP of $502. Both remain in active production.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster overall?

A: The Ryzen 5 7400F. It wins 14 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, holds a 32750 to 32076 average score advantage, and ranks in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs versus Intel's 82nd.

Q: How big is the rendering performance gap?

A: Consistently 36 percent in AMD's favor across all six Cinebench tests, multi-core and single-core alike, from R15 through R23.

Q: Does the Intel chip win anything?

A: Yes, three tests: floating point math (63064 vs 45799, 27.4 percent), integer math (85927 vs 74745, 13 percent), and physics (1854 vs 1660, 10.5 percent).

Q: Can either processor run without a graphics card?

A: Only the Core i7-13705H, which includes Iris Xe Graphics 96EU. The Ryzen 5 7400F lists no integrated graphics and needs discrete graphics to display output.

Q: Which platform has more PCIe connectivity?

A: The Ryzen 5 7400F, with 24 CPU-only Gen 5 lanes versus 8 CPU-only Gen 5 lanes on the Core i7-13705H.

Q: Which memory types does each support?

A: The Ryzen 5 7400F supports DDR5 only, with 83.2 GB/s of bandwidth and ECC capability. The Core i7-13705H supports both DDR4 and DDR5 but not ECC.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every specification that matters:

• Cores/threads: 6 cores, 12 threads (AMD) vs 14 cores, 20 threads (Intel)
• Clocks: 3.70 GHz base / 4.70 GHz boost (AMD) vs 2.40 GHz base / 5.00 GHz boost (Intel)
• TDP: 65 W (AMD) vs 45 W (Intel)
• Socket: AMD Socket AM5 (AMD) vs Intel BGA 1744, soldered (Intel)
• Process: 5 nm TSMC (AMD) vs 10 nm Intel (Intel)
• Die size: 71 mm² (AMD) vs 257 mm² (Intel)
• L1/L2 cache: 64 KB / 1 MB per core (AMD) vs 80 KB / 2 MB per core (Intel)
• L3 cache: 32 MB shared (AMD) vs 24 MB shared (Intel)
• Memory: DDR5 with ECC (AMD) vs DDR4/DDR5 without ECC (Intel)
• PCIe: 24 Gen 5 CPU lanes (AMD) vs 8 Gen 5 CPU lanes (Intel)
• Graphics: none (AMD) vs Iris Xe Graphics 96EU (Intel)
• Multiplier: unlocked (AMD) vs locked (Intel)
• Segment: desktop (AMD) vs mobile (Intel)

The Verdict

For a desktop build, the data makes the choice straightforward. The Ryzen 5 7400F delivers roughly 36 percent higher rendering performance, a 4.8 percent higher overall Passmark multithread rating, better single-thread responsiveness, double the L3 cache, triple the PCIe lanes, ECC support, and an unlocked multiplier, all while running in an upgradeable AM5 socket. Anyone doing content creation, compilation, or general productivity should pick it on the numbers alone.

The Core i7-13705H is not really competing for that slot. It is a mobile BGA part designed to be soldered into laptops, and its strengths reflect that: a 45 W TDP, integrated Iris Xe graphics for systems without a discrete GPU, flexible DDR4 or DDR5 memory support, and wins in floating point math (27.4 percent), integer math (13 percent), and physics (10.5 percent) that suit heavily threaded numerical workloads. Buyers choosing a pre-built laptop rather than assembling a desktop will find it a capable performer in the 82nd percentile, but against the 7400F on raw benchmark data it loses the matchup.

Where Each One Wins

Ryzen 5 7400F territory: Rendering is the clearest case, with 36 percent leads across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both multi-core and single-core modes. Workloads involving prime number computation favor it massively (64.7 percent), as do extended instruction sets (37.6 percent), string sorting (19.8 percent), compression (5.9 percent), encryption (2.4 percent), and general multitasking (4.8 percent). Its 24 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, 32 MB of L3, and ECC support make it the pick for expandable desktop systems, fast storage configurations, and workstation-adjacent tasks.

Core i7-13705H territory: The Intel chip is the choice where its three benchmark wins align with the workload: floating point heavy scientific or simulation code (63064 vs 45799), integer intensive processing (85927 vs 74745), and physics simulation (1854 vs 1660). Its integrated Iris Xe Graphics 96EU makes it the only option of the two for systems without a discrete graphics card, its 45 W TDP suits thin mobile designs, and its DDR4 compatibility gives system integrators memory flexibility the AMD part cannot match. For a laptop buyer, those attributes matter more than the Cinebench deficit.