AMD Ryzen 5 7400F vs Intel Core i9-11900 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score in the database?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F records an average benchmark score of 32,750, while the Intel Core i9-11900 records 32,226. The AMD part also sits at the 83rd percentile of all CPUs, versus the 82nd percentile for the Intel part.

Q: How large is the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F's lead in multi-threaded Cinebench testing?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F scores 21,765 versus 18,985 for the Intel Core i9-11900, a 14.6% advantage. The same 14.6% delta appears in Cinebench R15 and R20 multi-core tests as well.

Q: Does the Intel Core i9-11900 win any benchmark categories?

A: Yes. The Intel Core i9-11900 wins two PassMark tests: floating point math (48,948 versus 45,799, a 6.4% edge for Intel) and integer math (83,893 versus 74,745, a 10.9% edge for Intel).

Q: What is the most dramatic single-test gap between the two processors?

A: In the PassMark find prime numbers test, the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F scores 191 versus 63 for the Intel Core i9-11900, a 203.2% difference. This is by far the largest percentage delta in the head-to-head data.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i9-11900 does not.

Q: Which processor has an integrated GPU?

A: The Intel Core i9-11900 includes UHD Graphics 750, whereas the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F has no integrated graphics (listed as N/A).

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F is built on the Zen 4 architecture with the Raphael codename, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core i9-11900 uses the Rocket Lake architecture (also Rocket Lake codename) on Intel's 14 nm process. The manufacturing gap is substantial: the AMD chip's die size is 71 mm² with 6,570 million transistors, while the Intel chip's die is 276 mm².

Core counts differ. The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core i9-11900 has 8 cores and 16 threads. Clock speeds also differ: the AMD part runs at a 3.70 GHz base and 4.70 GHz boost, whereas the Intel part starts at 2.50 GHz base and boosts to 5.20 GHz. Both have a 65 W TDP.

Cache layouts diverge. Both share 64 KB of L1 per core, but the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F has 1 MB of L2 per core and 32 MB of shared L3. The Intel Core i9-11900 has 512 KB of L2 per core and 16 MB of shared L3. The AMD chip's L3 is double the Intel chip's L3.

Memory support is a major split. The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F supports DDR5 with dual-channel memory and a recorded bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. The Intel Core i9-11900 supports DDR4, also dual-channel, with a recorded bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. The AMD platform also enables ECC memory, while the Intel chip does not.

PCIe connectivity differs: the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F provides Gen 5 with 24 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel Core i9-11900 provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The Intel part includes UHD Graphics 750; the AMD part has no integrated graphics.

The sockets are incompatible: AMD Socket AM5 for the Ryzen 5 7400F, Intel Socket 1200 for the Core i9-11900. The AMD multiplier is unlocked; the Intel multiplier is locked. Production status also differs: the AMD chip is Active, while the Intel chip is End-of-life. Release dates sit roughly four years apart: the Intel part launched in March 2021, the AMD part in January 2025.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F dominates the multi-threaded Cinebench suite. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD part scores 2,193 against 1,913 for Intel, a 14.6% difference. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows the same 14.6% delta: 9,141 versus 7,973. Cinebench R23 multi-core repeats the pattern: 21,765 versus 18,985, again 14.6%. The consistency across all three Cinebench generations indicates a stable architectural advantage rather than a test-specific quirk.

Single-core Cinebench results tell the same story. The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F scores 309 in Cinebench R15 single-core versus 270 for the Intel Core i9-11900, a 14.4% lead. In R20 single-core, the AMD part scores 1,290 versus 1,125, a 14.7% lead. In R23 single-core, the AMD part scores 3,072 versus 2,680, a 14.6% lead. The AMD chip wins every Cinebench test by almost the same percentage, roughly 14.4 to 14.7%.

Beyond Cinebench, the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F wins PassMark's multithread test with 25,645 versus 22,456, a 14.2% margin. The PassMark physics test shows a much larger gap: 1,660 for AMD versus 977 for Intel, a 69.9% difference. The find prime numbers test is even more lopsided at 203.2% in favor of the AMD part (191 versus 63).

The AMD chip also wins PassMark data encryption by 19.9% (16,712 versus 13,942) and extended instructions by 10.6% (21,747 versus 19,654). PassMark random string sorting goes to AMD by 6.2% (35,096 versus 33,054). PassMark data compression is closer, with AMD ahead by just 1.7% (289,999 versus 285,159). PassMark single-thread testing shows a 9.4% AMD lead (3,689 versus 3,373).

The Intel Core i9-11900 takes two wins in the PassMark suite. Floating point math goes to Intel: 48,948 versus 45,799, a 6.4% margin. Integer math also goes to Intel: 83,893 versus 74,745, a 10.9% margin. These two wins show that the Intel chip retains strength in raw arithmetic workloads, likely tied to its higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz and extra cores.

Overall, the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F wins 15 of the 17 recorded head-to-head benchmarks, while the Intel Core i9-11900 wins 2.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F as the stronger processor across almost every measured workload. It wins all six Cinebench tests, all three PassMark multithread-related tests, and most PassMark single-thread tests. The average benchmark score difference is 32,750 versus 32,226, a modest gap, but the distribution of wins is heavily skewed: 15 wins for AMD versus 2 for Intel.

The Intel Core i9-11900 retains a clear edge only in floating point math and integer math. Those are meaningful for specific computational tasks, but they do not offset the AMD chip's advantages in rendering, physics, encryption, and prime number calculations. The AMD part's 14.6% lead across every Cinebench multi-core test, despite having 2 fewer cores and 4 fewer threads, shows that architectural efficiency and memory bandwidth (83.2 GB/s versus 51.2 GB/s) outweigh the Intel chip's raw core count.

For users prioritizing Cinebench-style rendering performance, the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F is the obvious choice. For users running heavily integer- or floating-point-bound code, the Intel Core i9-11900 retains a measurable niche. However, the AMD part also offers newer platform features: DDR5 support, PCIe Gen 5, ECC memory, and an active production status. The Intel part is end-of-life and locked to DDR4.

The percentile rankings are nearly identical (83rd versus 82nd), but the head-to-head margins tell the real story. The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F delivers consistent double-digit wins in most tests, with only two losses and neither exceeding 10.9%. The Intel Core i9-11900 wins neither Cinebench nor any PassMark multithread test, and its single-thread score trails by 9.4%.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every specification field. Core count: 6 versus 8. Threads: 12 versus 16. Base clock: 3.70 GHz versus 2.50 GHz. Boost clock: 4.70 GHz versus 5.20 GHz. Process node: 5 nm versus 14 nm. Foundry: TSMC versus Intel. Die size: 71 mm² versus 276 mm². Transistors: 6,570 million versus null (not recorded for Intel).

Cache: L2 per core is 1 MB for AMD versus 512 KB for Intel. L3 shared is 32 MB for AMD versus 16 MB for Intel. Memory support: DDR5 versus DDR4. Memory bandwidth: 83.2 GB/s versus 51.2 GB/s. ECC: true versus false. PCIe: Gen 5, 24 lanes versus Gen 4, 20 lanes. Integrated graphics: N/A versus UHD Graphics 750. Socket: AMD Socket AM5 versus Intel Socket 1200. Multiplier: unlocked versus locked. Production status: Active versus End-of-life. Launch MSRP: the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F carries a launch MSRP of $229, while the Intel Core i9-11900 carries a launch MSRP of $439.

The two share identical L1 cache (64 KB per core) and both use dual-channel memory buses. Both are desktop parts with a 65 W TDP. Release dates differ: March 2021 for Intel, January 2025 for AMD.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F wins in all rendering and multi-threaded productivity scenarios. Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests all show a 14.6% advantage. The PassMark multithread test shows a 14.2% lead. The physics test shows a 69.9% lead, making the AMD part the pick for simulation or physics-heavy workloads. The find prime numbers test (203.2% lead) points to a major advantage in prime-number or similar algorithmic tasks. Data encryption (19.9% lead) and extended instructions (10.6% lead) also favor AMD. Single-thread work in Cinebench and PassMark favors AMD by 9.4% to 14.7%.

The Intel Core i9-11900 wins in two specific PassMark categories. Floating point math (6.4% lead) and integer math (10.9% lead) are its only victories. These matter for code that is dominated by arithmetic operations, such as certain scientific simulations or number-crunching libraries that do not benefit from the AMD chip's larger L3 cache or faster memory bandwidth.

The Intel chip also offers an integrated GPU (UHD Graphics 750), which the AMD part lacks. For systems that need a display output without a discrete GPU, the Intel part has a functional advantage. The AMD part requires a separate graphics card.

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F also wins on platform longevity: it uses the AM5 socket with DDR5 and PCIe Gen 5, while the Intel part uses the older Socket 1200 with DDR4 and PCIe Gen 4. The AMD part is active in production; the Intel part is end-of-life. For new builds, the data strongly favors the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F across nearly every measured workload.