AMD Ryzen 5 8400F vs Intel Core 7 253PTE Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the core and thread configuration difference between the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and the Intel Core 7 253PTE?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core 7 253PTE has 10 cores and 20 threads.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 7 253PTE boosts to 5.40 GHz, which is higher than the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F's 4.70 GHz boost clock.

Q: What is the memory support difference between these two CPUs?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F supports DDR5 memory only, while the Intel Core 7 253PTE supports both DDR4 and DDR5. The Intel part also supports ECC memory, which the AMD part does not.

Q: Which processor has a higher single-thread benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 7 253PTE leads in single-thread performance. In PassMark single-thread, it scores 3794 versus 3685 for the AMD, a 2.9% advantage. In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 3003 versus 2943.

Q: How do the two processors compare in terms of PCIe support?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F uses PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel Core 7 253PTE uses PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only).

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core 7 253PTE includes UHD Graphics 730, while the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has no integrated graphics (N/A).

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F belongs to the 8000 series and uses the Zen 4 architecture with the Phoenix codename. It is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC, with 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The Intel Core 7 253PTE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and is built on a 10 nm process at Intel. The Intel part does not list a transistor count or die size in the database.

The cache hierarchies differ significantly. The AMD processor has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The Intel processor has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 33 MB of shared L3. The larger L3 allocation on the Intel side is notable for workloads that benefit from a bigger shared cache.

Memory support is another distinguishing factor. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F supports DDR5 only with dual-channel memory and a bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. The Intel Core 7 253PTE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, with a higher bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel part also supports ECC memory, which is absent on the AMD side.

The Intel processor includes integrated graphics in the form of UHD Graphics 730, while the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has no integrated graphics at all. This means the AMD part requires a discrete GPU for display output. The Intel part also uses PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the AMD part uses the older PCIe Gen 4 standard with 20 lanes.

The sockets differ: the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F uses AMD Socket AM5, while the Intel Core 7 253PTE uses Intel Socket 1700. The AMD processor has an unlocked multiplier, whereas the Intel processor does not. The release dates also differ, with the AMD part launching in March 2024 and the Intel part launching in March 2026, according to the database.

The Verdict

The benchmark data shows a clear split between the two processors. The Intel Core 7 253PTE wins 11 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, while the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F wins 6. The Intel part also holds a higher percentile ranking at 84 versus 77 for the AMD part, and a higher average benchmark score of 34962 versus 25005.

For users prioritizing single-thread performance, the Intel Core 7 253PTE is the stronger choice. It leads in every Cinebench single-core test and in PassMark single-thread tests. For users who need raw integer or floating-point throughput, the Intel part also dominates, with a 38.1% lead in integer math and a 31.2% lead in floating-point math.

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F wins in specific workloads. It leads in data compression by 4.5%, data encryption by 7.4%, extended instructions by 29.7%, prime number finding by 8.5%, physics by 1.1%, and random string sorting by 22.6%. These wins suggest the AMD architecture handles certain instruction patterns and memory-access workloads more efficiently.

The Intel Core 7 253PTE is the overall winner in the recorded data, with higher scores in the majority of tests and a higher percentile ranking. However, the AMD part offers a lower launch MSRP of $170 compared to the Intel part's $384, and it may appeal to users who specifically value its encryption and extended-instruction performance.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 8400F | Intel Core 7 253PTE |

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

| Cores | 6 | 10 |

| Threads | 12 | 20 |

| Base Clock | 4.20 GHz | 1.80 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.70 GHz | 5.40 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 45 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM5 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| 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) | 33 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 83.2 GB/s | 89.6 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 | $384 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core 7 253PTE takes a clean sweep in the Cinebench suite. In Cinebench R15 multicore, Intel scores 2144 versus AMD's 2101, a 2% advantage. The same 2% margin appears in R15 single-core, R20 multicore, R20 single-core, R23 multicore, and R23 single-core. The largest Cinebench gap is in R23 single-core, where Intel scores 3003 against AMD's 2943.

PassMark results show a more varied picture. The Intel part wins the multithread test with 25031 against 24389, a 2.6% margin. It also wins single-thread with 3794 against 3685, a 2.9% margin. The Intel part's biggest wins come in integer math and floating-point math. In integer math, Intel scores 119552 versus AMD's 74021, a dominant 38.1% advantage. In floating-point math, Intel scores 67209 versus AMD's 46217, a 31.2% advantage.

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F wins several PassMark subtests by substantial margins. The largest is extended instructions, where AMD scores 22175 versus Intel's 17099, a 29.7% advantage. Random string sorting shows AMD at 34604 versus Intel's 28227, a 22.6% lead. Prime number finding goes to AMD at 89 versus 82, an 8.5% margin. Data encryption favors AMD at 16646 versus 15500, a 7.4% margin. Data compression goes to AMD at 288158 versus 275828, a 4.5% margin. Physics is nearly tied, with AMD at 1332 versus Intel's 1318, a 1.1% margin.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 253PTE wins in every Cinebench test, covering both single-core and multicore workloads. It also wins PassMark multithread, single-thread, integer math, and floating-point math. This makes it the stronger processor for general productivity, integer-heavy computations, and floating-point workloads such as scientific simulations or media encoding. The 10-core, 20-thread configuration with a 5.40 GHz boost clock appears to drive these wins.

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F wins in data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, prime number finding, physics, and random string sorting. These wins are concentrated in workloads that involve encryption algorithms, AVX-style extended instructions, and string manipulation. The AMD part's 4 nm process and Zen 4 architecture likely contribute to its efficiency in these specific instruction patterns.

For users who need ECC memory support, the Intel Core 7 253PTE is the only option of the two, as it supports ECC while the AMD part does not. The Intel part also includes integrated graphics, making it usable without a discrete GPU, whereas the AMD part requires one. For users who need the higher memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s and the newer PCIe Gen 5 lanes, the Intel part provides that as well.

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F, with its lower launch MSRP of $170, offers a more accessible entry point, though the database does not assess value. Its wins in encryption and extended instructions point to specific use cases such as security-focused workloads or applications that heavily use SIMD instructions. The Intel Core 7 253PTE, with its higher launch MSRP of $384, delivers the overall higher benchmark scores and the broader set of wins across the majority of tests.