AMD Ryzen 5 7400F vs Intel Core Ultra 5 338H Comparison

# The Verdict

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F and Intel Core Ultra 5 338H are fundamentally different processors aimed at different platforms, and the benchmark data reflects that split. The Ryzen 5 7400F is a desktop part on AMD Socket AM5, while the Core Ultra 5 338H is a mobile processor on Intel BGA 2540. The database records 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with the Intel part winning 11 and the AMD part winning 6.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H holds the higher overall average benchmark score at 33989, compared to 32750 for the Ryzen 5 7400F. That places the Intel part at the 84th percentile of all CPUs in the database, one point above the AMD part's 83rd percentile. For users looking at raw aggregate performance, the data favors Intel.

However, the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F delivers the larger single-workload victories. Its 33.3% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 50.3% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core are the most dramatic margins in the comparison. Users running Cinebench R23 workloads should strongly favor the AMD desktop chip.

The Core Ultra 5 338H counters with a 45.5% advantage in PassMark floating point math and a 38.5% lead in PassMark physics. Its 12 physical cores, versus 6 for the AMD part, show up in these compute-heavy tests. The Intel chip also has integrated Arc B370 graphics, while the Ryzen 5 7400F has no integrated graphics, which matters for systems without a discrete GPU.

The verdict splits by use case. Desktop builders with an existing AM5 platform and a discrete GPU should look at the Ryzen 5 7400F, which has a launch MSRP of $229. Mobile users needing a low-power processor with integrated graphics and strong floating-point throughput should consider the Core Ultra 5 338H.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core (21765 vs 16331) and single-core (3072 vs 2044). It also takes PassMark integer math (74745 vs 64934), data compression (289999 vs 276539), and random string sorting (35096 vs 34082). These wins span both rendering workloads and integer-heavy productivity tasks.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H wins in Cinebench R15 multi-core (2504 vs 2193), R20 multi-core (10213 vs 9141), and R20 single-core (1441 vs 1290). It also wins PassMark floating point math (84067 vs 45799), physics (2697 vs 1660), data encryption (21367 vs 16712), extended instructions (23906 vs 21747), find prime numbers (304 vs 191), multithread (28717 vs 25645), and single-thread (4180 vs 3689).

The pattern is clear. The Intel part dominates in floating-point, physics, encryption, and newer Cinebench versions. The AMD part wins in integer math, compression, sorting, and Cinebench R23. For workloads that rely on AVX-style extended instructions or heavy FPU usage, the Intel chip is the stronger choice. For integer-heavy database, compression, and sorting tasks, the AMD chip pulls ahead.

Architecture Differences

The Ryzen 5 7400F uses AMD's Zen 4 architecture on the Raphael codename, built on TSMC's 5 nm process. It packs 6,570 million transistors into a 71 mm² die. The Core Ultra 5 338H uses Intel's Panther Lake architecture on a 3 nm process from Intel's own foundry. The process node difference is significant: 5 nm versus 3 nm.

Core counts differ sharply. The AMD part has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel part has 12 cores and 12 threads. This means the Intel chip uses all its cores for threads, with no hyperthreading, while the AMD chip doubles its 6 cores into 12 threads. The Intel part compensates with twice the physical core count.

Cache layouts also differ. The Ryzen 5 7400F has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra 5 338H has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The Intel part has more per-core cache at every level but less total L3.

Memory support differs: the AMD chip uses DDR5 with dual-channel memory and 83.2 GB/s bandwidth, plus ECC support. The Intel chip uses LPDDR5X with dual-channel memory and 136.5 GB/s bandwidth, but no ECC. The Intel part has a clear memory bandwidth advantage.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Ryzen 5 7400F offers Gen 5 with 24 lanes from the CPU, while the Core Ultra 5 338H offers Gen 5 with only 4 lanes from the CPU. Desktop users get far more expansion capability. The Intel part includes integrated Arc B370 graphics; the AMD part has no integrated graphics.

The Intel chip has a 25 W TDP versus 65 W for the AMD chip. It is also locked, while the AMD part has an unlocked multiplier. The Intel part is a mobile BGA package, the AMD part is a desktop socket part.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher overall average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H scores 33989 on average, compared to 32750 for the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F. The Intel part also sits at the 84th percentile of all CPUs, one point above the AMD part's 83rd percentile.

Q: Which chip is better for Cinebench R23 rendering?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F wins both tests. It scores 21765 in multi-core versus 16331 for the Intel part, a 33.3% lead, and 3072 in single-core versus 2044, a 50.3% lead.

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it uses Arc B370 integrated graphics. The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F has no integrated graphics, so a discrete GPU is required for display output.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H does not.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H provides 136.5 GB/s with LPDDR5X, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F provides 83.2 GB/s with DDR5. Both use dual-channel memory buses.

Q: Which chip has more PCIe lanes?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F has Gen 5 with 24 lanes from the CPU. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has Gen 5 with only 4 lanes from the CPU.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The biggest AMD win is Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Ryzen 5 7400F scores 3072 against 2044, a 50.3% margin. The same test in multi-core shows 21765 versus 16331, a 33.3% lead. These are the two most lopsided results in the comparison.

The Intel part's largest victory is PassMark floating point math: 84067 versus 45799, a 45.5% advantage. PassMark physics shows 2697 versus 1660, a 38.5% lead. PassMark find prime numbers goes to Intel at 304 versus 191, a 37.2% margin. PassMark data encryption favors Intel at 21367 versus 16712, a 21.8% lead.

In PassMark multithread, the Intel chip wins 28717 versus 25645, a 10.7% margin. PassMark single-thread also goes to Intel at 4180 versus 3689, an 11.7% lead. Cinebench R20 multi-core favors Intel at 10213 versus 9141, a 10.5% margin, and R20 single-core follows the same pattern at 1441 versus 1290, also 10.5%. Cinebench R15 multi-core goes to Intel at 2504 versus 2193, a 12.4% margin.

The AMD part wins PassMark integer math at 74745 versus 64934, a 15.1% margin. PassMark data compression goes to AMD at 289999 versus 276539, a 4.9% lead. PassMark random string sorting favors AMD at 35096 versus 34082, a 3% margin. Cinebench R15 single-core is the closest test, with AMD at 309 versus 305, a 1.3% lead.

The Intel chip wins 11 of 17 head-to-head comparisons, but the AMD chip wins the largest individual margins. The average benchmark scores reflect this: Intel leads overall at 33989 versus 32750, but the AMD part's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-14600T at 32707 (0.1% behind) and the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H at 32697 (0.2% behind). The Intel part's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H at 34083 (0.3% ahead) and the Intel Core i7-12800HX at 33875 (0.3% behind).

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field. Core counts: 6 for AMD, 12 for Intel. Threads: 12 for both. Base clock: 3.70 GHz for AMD, 1.90 GHz for Intel. Boost clock: 4.70 GHz for both. TDP: 65 W for AMD, 25 W for Intel.

Process node: 5 nm for AMD (TSMC), 3 nm for Intel (Intel foundry). Transistor count: 6,570 million for AMD, not recorded for Intel. Die size: 71 mm² for AMD, not recorded for Intel.

Cache: AMD has 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, 32 MB shared L3. Intel has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, 18 MB shared L3.

Memory: AMD uses DDR5, Intel uses LPDDR5X. Both are dual-channel, but bandwidth differs: 83.2 GB/s for AMD, 136.5 GB/s for Intel. ECC: supported on AMD, not on Intel.

PCIe: AMD has Gen 5 with 24 lanes, Intel has Gen 5 with 4 lanes. Integrated graphics: none on AMD, Arc B370 on Intel. Socket: AMD Socket AM5 for the desktop part, Intel BGA 2540 for the mobile part.

Market segment: desktop for AMD, mobile for Intel. Multiplier: unlocked for AMD, locked for Intel. Launch MSRP: $229 for AMD, none recorded for Intel. Release dates differ, with the AMD part listed as 2025-01-08 and the Intel part as 2026-01-04.