AMD Ryzen 5 8400F vs Intel Core 5 210H Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and Intel Core 5 210H occupy the same performance percentile, both landing at 77, yet the benchmark data reveals a decisive split in workload capability. The Ryzen 5 8400F wins all 17 head-to-head comparisons, with margins ranging from a modest 2.6% to a dominant 76.3%. The Intel Core 5 210H, despite its higher core count and boost clock, fails to take a single test in this dataset.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking divergence appears in multi-threaded rendering workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ryzen 5 8400F scores 20,851 against the Intel Core 5 210H’s 11,830, a 76.3% advantage. This gap is nearly identical in single-core R23 testing, where the AMD chip posts 2,943 versus 1,771, a 66.2% lead. The pattern holds across older Cinebench versions: R20 multi-core shows 8,757 against 6,504 (34.6% ahead), and R15 multi-core shows 2,101 against 1,757 (19.6% ahead). The single-core deltas in R20 and R15 are also 34.6% and 19.8%, respectively, indicating that the AMD architecture’s per-thread efficiency is the primary driver of the overall advantage.

PassMark’s suite reinforces the multi-threaded story. The Ryzen 5 8400F’s PassMark multi-thread score of 24,389 outpaces the Intel’s 18,252 by 33.6%. Integer math shows a 20.4% edge (74,021 vs 61,503), while floating-point math is closer at 46,217 versus 45,057, a 2.6% margin. The largest PassMark deltas appear in specialized workloads: extended instructions (22,175 vs 13,370, up 65.9%), find prime numbers (89 vs 53, up 67.9%), and random string sorting (34,604 vs 23,451, up 47.6%). Data compression favors the AMD chip by 32.3% (288,158 vs 217,805), and data encryption by 36.6% (16,646 vs 12,187).

The narrowest wins are instructive. PassMark single-thread scores sit at 3,685 for the Ryzen 5 8400F and 3,539 for the Intel, a 4.1% difference. Floating-point math, at 2.6%, is the smallest gap in the entire dataset. These results suggest that while the AMD chip leads in every measured category, its dominance is most pronounced in integer-heavy, parallel, and rendering workloads, rather than in simple scalar operations.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the data, the Ryzen 5 8400F wins every category in which both were tested. There is no benchmark in the provided set where the Intel Core 5 210H achieves a higher score. Consequently, the use-case split is not about which processor is faster for a given task, but rather about the magnitude of the AMD advantage across different workload types.

For rendering and content creation, the AMD chip is the clear choice. The Cinebench R23 multi-core result, where it leads by 76.3%, indicates a substantial advantage in CPU-bound rendering tasks. The 66.2% single-core lead in R23 also suggests faster viewport interaction and less latency in single-threaded application logic. For scientific computing and data analysis, the PassMark extended instructions score (65.9% ahead) and prime number finding (67.9% ahead) point to strong performance in vectorized and algorithmic workloads.

The Intel Core 5 210H’s closest performances come in floating-point math (2.6% behind) and single-thread PassMark (4.1% behind). These are the only two tests where the margin is under 20%, meaning that for purely scalar, floating-point-heavy applications, the two chips are nearly interchangeable. However, since the Intel part does not win any test, there is no workload category in this dataset where it is the superior option.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F is the faster processor in every benchmark recorded. With an average benchmark score of 25,005 versus 24,872 for the Intel Core 5 210H, the overall margin is small (0.5%), but the distribution of wins is not. The AMD chip’s 76.3% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 66.2% lead in single-core are the headline numbers. The Intel part’s nearest rivals list includes the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F (deltaPct -0.4) and AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX (deltaPct 0.2), indicating it competes with AMD’s previous-generation and mid-range parts, not with the 8400F.

Buyers should choose the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F if they prioritize rendering, multi-threaded productivity, or encryption/compression workloads, where its advantages range from 20% to 76%. The Intel Core 5 210H is only defensible if the system requires its integrated Iris Xe Graphics 48EU, its lower 45W TDP, or its support for DDR4 memory — none of which are performance advantages in the benchmark data. For pure CPU throughput, the 8400F wins every test.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F scores 20,851, which is 76.3% higher than the Intel Core 5 210H’s 11,830.

Q: Is there any benchmark where the Intel Core 5 210H wins?

A: No. In the 17 head-to-head benchmarks provided, the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F wins all 17; the Intel Core 5 210H records zero wins.

Q: How close are the two in single-thread performance?

A: PassMark single-thread scores are 3,685 for the AMD part and 3,539 for the Intel part, a 4.1% difference. Cinebench R23 single-core shows a larger gap: 2,943 vs 1,771, a 66.2% lead.

Q: What are the biggest performance gaps between the two?

A: The largest margins are in Cinebench R23 multi-core (76.3%), PassMark find prime numbers (67.9%), and PassMark extended instructions (65.9%). The smallest margin is in PassMark floating-point math at 2.6%.

Q: Does the Intel Core 5 210H have any hardware features the AMD lacks?

A: Yes. The Intel part includes integrated Iris Xe Graphics 48EU, supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, and has a 45W TDP. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has no integrated graphics, supports only DDR5, and has a 65W TDP.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has an average benchmark score of 25,005, while the Intel Core 5 210H averages 24,872, a difference of approximately 0.5%.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F is built on the Zen 4 architecture with the Phoenix codename, manufactured on TSMC’s 4 nm process. It contains 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The Intel Core 5 210H uses the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-H codename, fabricated on Intel’s 10 nm process. The Intel chip has no listed transistor count or die size.

The AMD part features 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel part has 8 cores and 12 threads. Despite fewer physical cores, the AMD chip wins all multi-threaded tests. Cache configurations differ significantly: the AMD chip has 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3. The Intel chip has 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3. The larger L3 cache on the AMD side may contribute to its performance advantage.

Memory support differs: the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F supports DDR5 only, with dual-channel memory and a bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. The Intel Core 5 210H supports both DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode, but no memory bandwidth figure is provided. PCIe connectivity also differs — the AMD chip uses Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes, while the Intel chip uses Gen 5 with 8 CPU lanes. The AMD processor has no integrated graphics, whereas the Intel part includes Iris Xe Graphics 48EU.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several specification fields. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz; the Intel Core 5 210H has a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Intel chip has a higher boost clock, yet loses every benchmark. The AMD part has a 65W TDP, while the Intel part is rated at 45W.

The socket is a key differentiator: the AMD chip uses AMD Socket AM5, while the Intel chip uses Intel BGA 1744 (a mobile socket). The AMD processor has an unlocked multiplier, the Intel one is locked. The AMD chip is a desktop part; the Intel chip is a mobile part. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F launched on 2024-03-31 with a launch MSRP of $170; the Intel Core 5 210H launched on 2024-12-17 with a launch MSRP of $342. The AMD part’s part number is 100-000001591; the Intel part’s is SRQ6RQ5MN.