AMD Ryzen 5 8400F vs Intel Core 5 211E Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E holds a higher average benchmark score of 37829, compared to the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F's 25005. The Intel part also sits in the 86th percentile of all CPUs, while the AMD chip sits in the 77th percentile.

Q: How do the two processors compare in Cinebench multi-core tests?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F wins every Cinebench multi-core test. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 20851 against 20389 for the Intel Core 5 211E, a 2.3% advantage. Similar margins appear in R20 (8757 vs 8563, 2.3% ahead) and R15 (2101 vs 2055, 2.2% ahead).

Q: Which processor has better single-thread performance in PassMark?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E leads in PassMark single-thread performance, scoring 4006 versus 3685 for the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F, an 8% advantage. This holds for both the "single_thread" and "singlethread" test entries, which record identical scores.

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

A: The largest gap is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F scores 89 against 43 for the Intel Core 5 211E, a 107% advantage. The second-largest gap is in PassMark physics, where AMD leads 1332 to 702, a 89.7% margin.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F supports only DDR5 memory, while the Intel Core 5 211E supports both DDR4 and DDR5. The AMD chip has a higher rated memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s for the Intel part.

Q: Which processor includes integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E includes UHD Graphics 730. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has no integrated graphics (listed as N/A). This means the AMD chip requires a discrete graphics card for any display output.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F uses the Zen 4 architecture under the Phoenix codename, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It packs 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core 5 211E uses the Bartlett Lake codename, built on a 10 nm process at Intel, with 10 cores and 16 threads. The Intel chip has more physical cores and threads, but the AMD chip has a higher base clock: 4.20 GHz versus 2.70 GHz. Boost clocks are closer, with the Intel part reaching 4.90 GHz versus 4.70 GHz for the AMD chip.

Cache layouts differ substantially. The AMD processor has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel processor has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part holds a larger cache at every level.

The memory controller also differs. The AMD chip supports DDR5 only, with dual-channel memory and 83.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel chip supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, but with a lower peak bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The Intel part supports ECC memory; the AMD part does not.

PCIe connectivity is another split. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F provides PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The Intel Core 5 211E provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Intel part also includes UHD Graphics 730 integrated graphics, while the AMD chip has none.

The AMD processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel processor is locked. The AMD chip uses Socket AM5; the Intel chip uses Socket 1700. The AMD die measures 178 mm² with 25,000 million transistors. The Intel die measures 257 mm², with no transistor count recorded in the database.

Both parts carry a 65 W TDP and are classified as desktop market segment processors. Both are listed as active production. The AMD part launched in March 2024, while the Intel part launched in January 2025.

The Verdict

The benchmark data splits cleanly by workload type. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F wins 11 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons, including every Cinebench test and most PassMark compute tests. The Intel Core 5 211E wins 6 comparisons, concentrated in PassMark integer-heavy and data-encryption workloads.

For users running Cinebench-style rendering tasks, the AMD chip is consistently ahead, albeit by narrow margins of roughly 2.3%. The same holds for PassMark multithread (24389 vs 23833, 2.3% ahead), extended instructions (22175 vs 21592, 2.7% ahead), random string sorting (34604 vs 34308, 0.9% ahead), and the two massive wins in find prime numbers and physics.

For users running PassMark's floating-point math, integer math, data compression, data encryption, or single-thread tests, the Intel chip takes the lead. The single-thread gap is 8%, the floating-point gap is 30.4%, and the data compression gap is 16.9%.

The Intel part also brings integrated graphics and ECC memory support, which the AMD part lacks. The AMD part has a higher memory bandwidth rating, an unlocked multiplier, and a smaller die on a more advanced process node. The Intel part has more cores, more threads, and a higher boost clock.

The data does not show a universal winner. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F is the better choice for physics simulation, prime-number work, and rendering-style multi-core tasks. The Intel Core 5 211E is the better choice for single-thread performance, floating-point throughput, data compression, and encryption workloads, plus any system that needs integrated graphics or ECC memory.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 8400F | Intel Core 5 211E |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 6 | 10 |

| Threads | 12 | 16 |

| Base clock | 4.20 GHz | 2.70 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.70 GHz | 4.90 GHz |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM5 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Codename | Phoenix | Bartlett Lake |

| Process node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die size | 178 mm² | 257 mm² |

| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 16 MB (shared) | 20 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory bandwidth | 83.2 GB/s | 76.8 GB/s |

| ECC memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes | Gen 5, 16 Lanes |

| Integrated graphics | N/A | UHD Graphics 730 |

| Multiplier unlocked | Yes | No |

| Launch MSRP | $170 | $221 |

| Release date | March 2024 | January 2025 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F dominates the Cinebench suite. In R15 multi-core, it scores 2101 versus 2055, a 2.2% win. In R15 single-core, 296 versus 289, a 2.4% win. In R20 multi-core, 8757 versus 8563, a 2.3% win. In R20 single-core, 1236 versus 1208, a 2.3% win. In R23 multi-core, 20851 versus 20389, a 2.3% win. In R23 single-core, 2943 versus 2878, a 2.3% win. Every Cinebench result favors the AMD chip, and the margins are consistent between 2.2% and 2.4%.

The PassMark suite splits more dramatically. The AMD chip wins PassMark multithread with 24389 against 23833, a 2.3% margin. It also wins extended instructions (22175 vs 21592, 2.7%), find prime numbers (89 vs 43, 107%), physics (1332 vs 702, 89.7%), and random string sorting (34604 vs 34308, 0.9%).

The Intel Core 5 211E wins the remaining PassMark tests by larger margins. PassMark single-thread shows 4006 versus 3685, an 8% lead. PassMark floating-point math shows 66402 versus 46217, a 30.4% lead. PassMark integer math shows 88117 versus 74021, a 16% lead. PassMark data compression shows 346757 versus 288158, a 16.9% lead. PassMark data encryption shows 17938 versus 16646, a 7.2% lead.

The overall tally is 11 wins for the AMD chip and 6 for the Intel chip. However, the Intel wins tend to be larger in absolute percentage terms. The AMD wins are mostly clustered in the 0.9% to 2.7% range, with two exceptional wins in physics and prime numbers.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F wins in every Cinebench rendering test, covering both single-core and multi-core variants. It also wins PassMark multithread, extended instructions, random string sorting, physics, and find prime numbers. The physics result (89.7% ahead) and the prime-number result (107% ahead) are the standout margins. These results suggest the AMD chip has a strong advantage in workloads that stress branch prediction, integer-heavy prime calculations, and physics simulation.

The Intel Core 5 211E wins in PassMark single-thread, floating-point math, integer math, data compression, and data encryption. The floating-point result (30.4% ahead) and the compression result (16.9% ahead) are its largest wins. The single-thread win (8% ahead) is notable given that the AMD chip has a higher base clock, indicating that the Intel architecture extracts more performance per clock in this specific test.

Workload split: choose the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F for Cinebench rendering, physics simulation, prime-number search, and general multi-thread compute. Choose the Intel Core 5 211E for single-thread responsiveness, floating-point math-heavy applications, data compression, encryption, and any build requiring integrated graphics or ECC memory. The Intel chip also offers more cores and threads (10/16 versus 6/12) and a higher boost clock (4.90 GHz versus 4.70 GHz), which may matter for parallel workloads that scale beyond the AMD chip's thread count. The AMD chip counters with a higher base clock, higher memory bandwidth, and a more modern process node.