AMD Ryzen 5 7400F vs Intel Core Ultra X7 368H Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core performance in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H scores 3984 in Cinebench R23 single-core, versus 3072 for the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F, a 22.9% advantage for Intel.

Q: How do the two processors compare in the PassMark multithread test?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H scores 32956, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F scores 25645. Intel leads by 22.2% in this workload.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two in any recorded benchmark?

A: The biggest gap is in PassMark floating point math, where the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H scores 105681 versus 45799 for the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F, a 56.7% difference.

Q: Which processor uses a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is built on a 3 nm process, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F uses a 5 nm process.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H does not.

Q: What is the difference in thread counts between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has 16 cores and 16 threads.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data shows a complete sweep for the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H. Across all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, Intel wins every test. The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F records zero wins in the head-to-head dataset.

The Intel part dominates most heavily in compute-intensive workloads. PassMark floating point math shows a 56.7% lead, the largest margin of any test. PassMark physics follows with a 41.9% advantage, and PassMark find prime numbers shows a 40.5% gap. These results indicate that the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has a substantial edge in raw arithmetic throughput and simulation-style workloads.

More moderate advantages appear in memory-oriented and general tasks. PassMark data encryption shows a 33.8% lead for Intel, while PassMark extended instructions trails at 15.3%, and PassMark integer math sits at 15.1%. The smallest gaps are in PassMark data compression (7.3%), PassMark random string sorting (7.9%), and PassMark single-thread (7.9%). Even in its weakest areas, the Intel processor still maintains a clear lead.

The Cinebench suite reveals a consistent pattern. Every Cinebench test, whether R15, R20, or R23, and regardless of single-core or multi-core, shows the same 22.9% delta in favor of the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H. This uniformity across rendering workloads suggests the Intel part holds a stable architectural advantage rather than one tied to a specific benchmark quirk.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F uses Zen 4 architecture under the Raphael codename, part of the Ryzen 5 generation. It is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC and contains 6,570 million transistors on a 71 mm² die. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H uses Panther Lake architecture, also its codename, and belongs to the Ultra X7 (Panther Lake-H) generation. It is fabricated on a 3 nm process at Intel.

Core counts diverge sharply. AMD provides 6 cores and 12 threads, relying on simultaneous multithreading to double thread count. Intel provides 16 cores and 16 threads, with no multithreading on any core. Despite having fewer threads, the Intel part wins all multi-threaded benchmarks in the dataset.

Cache hierarchies differ in structure and size. The AMD processor allocates 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3. The Intel processor allocates 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. Intel's per-core cache is larger, while AMD's shared L3 pool is larger.

Memory architecture also separates the two. AMD supports DDR5 with dual-channel access, delivering 83.2 GB/s of bandwidth. Intel uses LPDDR5X with dual-channel access, delivering 153.6 GB/s. The Intel platform offers nearly double the memory bandwidth, which likely contributes to its wins in data-heavy PassMark tests.

PCIe capabilities differ significantly. The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F provides Gen 5 with 24 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H provides Gen 5 with only 4 lanes from the CPU. This reflects the market split: AMD targets desktop expansion, while Intel targets mobile integration.

The AMD processor includes no integrated graphics. The Intel processor includes Arc B390 integrated graphics, a feature that matters for systems without a discrete GPU. The AMD part has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel part is locked. ECC memory support exists only on the AMD side.

Specification Differences

Clock speeds favor Intel. The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F runs at a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H runs at a base clock of 2.00 GHz but boosts to 5.00 GHz. Intel's higher boost ceiling aligns with its single-core benchmark wins.

Thermal design power differs by a wide margin. The AMD part is rated at 65 W, while the Intel part is rated at 25 W. The Intel processor delivers higher benchmark scores across the board while carrying a lower TDP rating, an efficiency advantage in the recorded data.

The market segments and sockets tell different stories. AMD targets the desktop segment with an AMD Socket AM5. Intel targets the mobile segment with an Intel BGA 2540 socket. Release dates are close: the AMD processor launched on 2025-01-08, and the Intel processor launched on 2026-01-04.

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F has a launch MSRP of $229. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has no recorded launch MSRP. Production status for both is Active.

Processor part numbers differ: the AMD unit carries part number 100-000001845, while the Intel unit carries SA4R7Q9EJ. The AMD processor belongs to the 7000 series, and the Intel processor belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite shows a consistent 22.9% advantage for the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H across all six tests. In Cinebench R15 multicore, Intel scores 2844 versus 2193 for AMD. In R15 single-core, Intel scores 401 versus 309. The R20 multicore test shows Intel at 11852 and AMD at 9141. R20 single-core puts Intel at 1673 and AMD at 1290. Cinebench R23 multicore delivers Intel 28221 against AMD 21765, and R23 single-core delivers Intel 3984 against AMD 3072. Every one of these tests lands at exactly the same 22.9% delta, indicating a uniform performance ratio in rendering workloads.

PassMark floating point math produces the largest single gap. Intel scores 105681, AMD scores 45799, and the delta reaches 56.7%. This is the standout result in the dataset. It suggests the Intel architecture is far more efficient at floating-point operations, which are common in scientific computing, physics simulation, and financial modeling.

PassMark physics shows a 41.9% gap. Intel scores 2857, AMD scores 1660. PassMark find prime numbers shows a 40.5% gap, with Intel at 321 and AMD at 191. These two tests reinforce the pattern of Intel dominance in compute-heavy integer and physics workloads.

PassMark data encryption shows a 33.8% lead for Intel. Intel scores 25228, AMD scores 16712. This indicates a substantial advantage in cryptographic workloads, which often depend on specialized instruction throughput.

Moderate gaps appear in PassMark extended instructions and integer math. Extended instructions show Intel at 25669 versus AMD at 21747, a 15.3% delta. Integer math shows Intel at 88083 versus AMD at 74745, a 15.1% delta. Both tests reflect solid but less dramatic Intel advantages.

PassMark multithread shows Intel at 32956 and AMD at 25645, a 22.2% gap. This test aligns closely with the Cinebench multicore results, reinforcing that the Intel part wins multi-threaded workloads despite having only 16 threads versus AMD's 12 threads.

The narrowest margins appear in PassMark random string sorting, single-thread, and data compression. Random string sorting shows Intel at 38093 and AMD at 35096, a 7.9% delta. Single-thread shows Intel at 4005 and AMD at 3689, also a 7.9% delta. Data compression shows Intel at 312927 and AMD at 289999, a 7.3% delta. These tests indicate that even where the two processors are closest, the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H still holds a measurable edge.

The aggregate benchmark average confirms the overall picture. The AMD Ryzen 5 7400F has an average benchmark score of 32750, placing it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has an average benchmark score of 40518, placing it in the 87th percentile. The Intel part sits 23.7% higher in average score. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core 7 253PE at 40557 and the Intel Core 5 223PE at 40585, both within 0.2%. The AMD part's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-14600T at 32707 and the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H at 32697, both within 0.2%. These proximity values show that each processor is closely matched to its own competitive tier, but the Intel tier sits substantially higher in absolute performance.