AMD Ryzen 5 8400F vs Intel Core 5 213PE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a clear overall winner in raw performance: the Intel Core 5 213PE takes 14 of the 17 recorded benchmark comparisons, while the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F wins 3. The margin of victory for Intel is not uniform, however, and the AMD chip secures its wins in specific workloads that may matter more for certain users.

In the Cinebench suite, Intel leads by a consistent 7.2% across all six tests. The Cinebench R23 multicore score for the Intel Core 5 213PE is 22468 versus 20851 for the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F, with the same 7.2% delta applying to Cinebench R15 and R20, in both single-core and multi-core variants. This uniformity suggests a fundamental per-thread advantage for Intel in rendering workloads, not just a core-count advantage.

The Passmark single-thread test confirms this: Intel scores 4060 against 3685, a 9.2% lead. The same 9.2% delta appears in the duplicate passmark_singlethread entry. In integer math, Intel leads by 19.6% (92089 versus 74021), and in floating-point math the gap widens to 32.6% (68587 versus 46217), which is the largest single delta in the entire comparison. Intel also wins in prime number finding by 21.9% (114 versus 89), physics by 18% (1624 versus 1332), and multithread by 7.7% (26434 versus 24389). Data compression goes to Intel by a narrower 3.6% (298804 versus 288158).

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F fights back in three areas. The biggest win is in extended instructions: 22175 versus 19565, a 13.3% advantage. Data encryption also favors AMD by 4.6% (16646 versus 15916). Random string sorting shows an 8% lead for AMD (34604 versus 32027). These are not trivial workloads, but they are narrower wins than Intel's largest margins.

Overall average benchmark scores place the Intel Core 5 213PE at 35428, which puts it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F averages 25005, at the 77th percentile. The nearest rival data for Intel shows it sitting close to the Intel Core i7-13700T (0.1% ahead), Core i7-12700KF (0.2% ahead), and Core i5-13600T (0.3% ahead). The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F, by contrast, sits within 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F, Intel Core i7-11850H, and Intel Core i7-13620H.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher single-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PE scores 3172 in Cinebench R23 single-core, while the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F scores 2943. Intel leads by 7.2%.

Q: Are there any workloads where the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F wins?

A: Yes. The AMD chip wins in Passmark extended instructions by 13.3% (22175 versus 19565), data encryption by 4.6% (16646 versus 15916), and random string sorting by 8% (34604 versus 32027).

Q: How do the two CPUs compare in multi-threaded performance?

A: Intel leads in Passmark multithread with 26434 versus 24389, a 7.7% advantage. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, Intel scores 22468 versus 20851, also a 7.2% lead. The Intel Core 5 213PE has 8 cores and 16 threads, versus 6 cores and 12 threads for the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F.

Q: What is the largest performance gap in either direction?

A: The largest gap is in Passmark floating-point math, where Intel leads by 32.6% (68587 versus 46217). The largest AMD win is in extended instructions at 13.3%.

Q: Do both CPUs support the same memory types?

A: No. The Intel Core 5 213PE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F supports DDR5 only. Both use dual-channel memory buses.

Q: Which CPU has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PE includes UHD Graphics 730. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has no integrated graphics (listed as N/A).

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 213PE is the stronger choice for compute-heavy workloads that stress integer and floating-point arithmetic. Its 19.6% lead in integer math and 32.6% lead in floating-point math make it the pick for scientific computing, financial modeling, and any task that relies heavily on mathematical throughput. The 21.9% advantage in prime number finding reinforces this pattern, as does the 18% lead in physics simulations. For rendering, the 7.2% Cinebench lead across all versions means faster exports in Blender, Cinema 4D, and similar applications. Data compression at 3.6% ahead adds another productivity win.

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has a narrower but real set of advantages. The 13.3% lead in extended instructions indicates better handling of SIMD-heavy code, which can matter for media encoding and some scientific libraries. The 4.6% edge in data encryption makes it the better choice for full-disk encryption workloads, VPN termination, or secure communications processing. The 8% lead in random string sorting suggests an advantage in database indexing, text processing, and some data analytics pipelines. These are not mainstream workloads, but they are specific enough to matter for targeted use cases.

For mixed productivity, the Intel chip's multithread lead of 7.7% and single-thread lead of 9.2% mean it will generally feel faster in everyday use, from application launches to spreadsheet recalculations. The data does not show any scenario where the AMD chip outperforms in general-purpose computing.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs differ in nearly every core specification. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core 5 213PE has 8 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 4.20 GHz for AMD versus 2.70 GHz for Intel, but boost clocks reverse the order: 4.70 GHz for AMD versus 5.20 GHz for Intel. Both have a 65 W TDP.

Cache configurations also differ. 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 24 MB shared L3.

Memory support diverges: AMD supports DDR5 only with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth, while Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD chip does not support ECC memory; the Intel chip does.

PCIe connectivity differs in generation and lane count. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F uses PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel Core 5 213PE uses PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The AMD chip has an unlocked multiplier; the Intel chip does not.

Socket and platform are distinct: AMD Socket AM5 for the Ryzen 5 8400F versus Intel Socket 1700 for the Core 5 213PE. The Intel chip includes integrated UHD Graphics 730, while the AMD chip has none. The Intel part carries a launch MSRP of $221; the AMD part's launch MSRP is $170.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F uses the Zen 4 architecture under the codename Phoenix, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The die contains 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. It is part of the 8000 series and the Ryzen 5 generation. The Intel Core 5 213PE uses the Bartlett Lake codename, built on a 10 nm process at Intel, and belongs to the Core 5 generation. Intel's transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database.

These architectural differences explain the performance patterns. The Intel chip's 10 nm process and Bartlett Lake design deliver substantially higher boost clocks (5.20 GHz versus 4.70 GHz), which drives its single-thread and floating-point advantages. The AMD chip's 4 nm TSMC process allows a lower base clock but still achieves a respectable boost, and its Zen 4 design excels in the extended instructions and encryption workloads where it wins.

The Intel chip's larger L3 cache (24 MB versus 16 MB) and larger per-core L2 (2 MB versus 1 MB) likely contribute to its integer math and data compression leads. The AMD chip's smaller cache but newer process node does not translate into a general performance advantage in this comparison, except in the specific SIMD and encryption tests.

The PCIe generation difference is notable: Intel provides PCIe Gen 5 lanes while AMD provides Gen 4. For users with Gen 5 NVMe drives or GPUs, the Intel platform offers more headroom for storage and expansion bandwidth. The Intel chip also adds ECC memory support, a feature absent on the AMD part, which may matter for error-sensitive workloads.

The Verdict

The benchmark data directs different users to different chips. The Intel Core 5 213PE is the pick for anyone whose workload is dominated by floating-point math, integer math, physics simulations, or rendering. Its 32.6% lead in floating-point math and 19.6% lead in integer math are decisive, and the 7.2% Cinebench advantage confirms broad rendering superiority. The 85th percentile standing and proximity to the Core i7-12700K family in the nearest rival data (within 0.4%) reinforce its high overall positioning.

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F is the pick for workloads that specifically benefit from extended instructions, encryption, or random string sorting. The 13.3% lead in extended instructions and 4.6% lead in encryption are not large enough to overcome Intel's overall lead, but they define a niche where the AMD chip is measurably better. The 77th percentile and nearest rival scores within 0.4% of the Ryzen 5 7500F and Core i7-13620H show it competes at a slightly lower performance tier.

For users who need ECC memory, integrated graphics, or PCIe Gen 5, the Intel Core 5 213PE is the only option between these two. For users who want an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F provides that flexibility. The Intel chip's higher core count (8 versus 6) and thread count (16 versus 12) align with its multi-thread benchmark wins, making it the default choice for heavily threaded workloads. The AMD chip's wins are real but confined to three specific tests, so the overall verdict favors Intel in the majority of use cases.