AMD Ryzen 5 8400F vs Intel Core i5-11600 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and Intel Core i5-11600 are both six-core, twelve-thread desktop processors, but the benchmark data reveals a decisive generational gap. The Ryzen 5 8400F wins every single head-to-head comparison in the database, with victory margins that range from modest single-thread gains to overwhelming multi-thread and specialized workload leads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking pattern is the consistency of the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F's advantage. Across all 17 recorded head-to-head benchmarks, the AMD part wins outright, and the margins are rarely close. In Cinebench testing, the Ryzen 5 8400F delivers a 36.6% lead in every single test variant, including Cinebench R15 multicore (2101 vs 1538), Cinebench R20 multicore (8757 vs 6412), and Cinebench R23 multicore (20851 vs 15269). The single-core Cinebench results tell the same story: the 8400F scores 296 in R15, 1236 in R20, and 2943 in R23, each exactly 36.6% ahead of the Intel part's 217, 905, and 2155 respectively.

This uniform 36.6% delta across both single-core and multi-core Cinebench tests is unusual. It indicates the architectural efficiency advantage of the Ryzen 5 8400F scales evenly across all thread counts in rendering workloads, rather than being dependent on core count or frequency headroom. The Intel Core i5-11600's higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz does not translate into any competitive advantage against the AMD part's 4.70 GHz boost in these tests.

PassMark results reinforce the same narrative, though with more variation in margins. The largest gap appears in prime number finding, where the Ryzen 5 8400F scores 89 versus 56, a 58.9% advantage. Data encryption shows a 50.5% lead (16646 vs 11060), and physics testing shows a 49.5% lead (1332 vs 891). Extended instructions deliver a 41.3% advantage (22175 vs 15698), while random string sorting sits at 37.4% (34604 vs 25178).

The smallest margins are still decisive. PassMark single-thread results show the AMD part at 3685 versus 3284, a 12.2% lead, which is the narrowest gap in the entire dataset. Integer math shows a 23% advantage (74021 vs 60158), and floating-point math shows a 30.3% lead (46217 vs 35478). Data compression, a workload sensitive to memory bandwidth and cache, comes in at 32.1% (288158 vs 218062). The overall PassMark multithread score shows 24389 versus 17918, a 36.1% delta that mirrors the Cinebench multi-core results.

The average benchmark scores in the database confirm the hierarchy. The Ryzen 5 8400F records an average benchmark score of 25005, while the Core i5-11600 sits at 24563. The Ryzen 5 8400F's nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F at 24964 (0.2% behind), the Intel Core i7-11850H at 24935 (0.3% behind), and the Intel Core i7-13620H at 24911 (0.4% behind). The Intel Core i5-11600's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-12450HX at 24576 (0.1% ahead), the AMD EPYC 9654P at 24465 (0.4% behind), and the AMD Ryzen 7 5700X3D at 24709 (0.6% ahead). Both processors sit at the 77th percentile among all CPUs in the database, but the raw scores show the AMD part holds a meaningful edge over its direct Intel counterpart.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design eras. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F uses the Zen 4 architecture with the Phoenix codename, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC with 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The Intel Core i5-11600 uses the Rocket Lake architecture, built on Intel's 14 nm process with a 276 mm² die. The process node difference alone explains much of the efficiency gap, though the database does not include direct power consumption measurements beyond the 65 W TDP that both processors share.

Cache hierarchies diverge significantly. The Ryzen 5 8400F allocates 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and only 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part's larger L2 and L3 allocations likely contribute to its strong data compression and encryption results.

Memory support also separates the two platforms. The Ryzen 5 8400F supports DDR5 memory with dual-channel configuration and a theoretical memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. The Intel Core i5-11600 supports DDR4 memory, also dual-channel, with a theoretical memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. The 32 GB/s bandwidth gap aligns with the data-heavy workload advantages seen in the benchmark results.

Both processors use PCIe Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes, and neither supports ECC memory. The Ryzen 5 8400F has no integrated graphics, while the Intel part's integrated graphics status is not recorded in the database. The AMD part has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel part is locked. The Ryzen 5 8400F uses the AMD Socket AM5 platform, while the Intel part uses Socket 1200. The Ryzen 5 8400F's base clock is 4.20 GHz with a boost of 4.70 GHz, while the Intel part's base clock is 2.80 GHz with a boost of 4.80 GHz. Despite the Intel part's higher top boost clock, the AMD part's higher base clock and architectural efficiency win every benchmark.

The manufacturing and availability status differs as well. The Ryzen 5 8400F is listed as Active in production, released on 2024-03-31, with a launch MSRP of $170. The Intel Core i5-11600 is End-of-life, released on 2021-03-15, with a launch MSRP of $213.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F wins decisively with a score of 20851 versus 15269 for the Intel Core i5-11600, a 36.6% advantage.

Q: Is the Intel Core i5-11600 competitive in single-thread workloads?

A: No. Despite a higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz, the Intel part loses every single-thread benchmark. The narrowest margin is PassMark single-thread at 3685 versus 3284, a 12.2% lead for the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F. In Cinebench single-core tests, the AMD part leads by 36.6% consistently.

Q: How do the two processors compare on memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F supports DDR5 with 83.2 GB/s theoretical bandwidth, while the Intel Core i5-11600 supports DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s theoretical bandwidth. Both use dual-channel memory configurations.

Q: Where does the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F rank relative to its nearest rivals?

A: The database places the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F at the 77th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 25005. It sits 0.2% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F and 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core i7-11850H.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two processors?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F scores 89 versus 56 for the Intel Core i5-11600, a 58.9% advantage. Data encryption also shows a very large 50.5% gap.

Q: Do both processors share the same TDP?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and Intel Core i5-11600 have a 65 W TDP. However, the AMD part is built on a 4 nm TSMC process while the Intel part uses Intel's 14 nm process, and the database does not include direct power draw measurements beyond TDP.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F outperforms the Intel Core i5-11600 in every recorded benchmark, with margins ranging from 12.2% to 58.9%. The average benchmark score of 25005 versus 24563 places the AMD part clearly ahead, even though both processors sit at the 77th percentile in the overall database.

For rendering workloads, the Ryzen 5 8400F is the clear choice. The uniform 36.6% lead across all Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 tests, both single and multi-core, indicates broad architectural superiority rather than workload-specific tuning. The 20851 Cinebench R23 multi-core score versus 15269 represents a substantial productivity advantage.

For data-heavy and encryption workloads, the Ryzen 5 8400F's advantages grow even larger. The 50.5% lead in data encryption and 58.9% lead in prime number finding suggest the Zen 4 architecture, larger cache allocation, and DDR5 memory support provide compounding benefits. The Intel Core i5-11600's smaller 12 MB L3 cache and DDR4 memory support appear to be limiting factors.

The only category where the Intel part remains remotely competitive is raw single-thread PassMark performance, where the 12.2% gap is the smallest in the dataset. Even there, the Intel part loses. For any user choosing between these two specific processors, the recorded data shows the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F is the superior part across the board. The Intel Core i5-11600, being end-of-life and built on an older 14 nm process, cannot match the efficiency or output of the newer Zen 4 design.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 8400F | Intel Core i5-11600 |

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

| Base Clock | 4.20 GHz | 2.80 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.70 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| Process Node | 4 nm (TSMC) | 14 nm (Intel) |

| Die Size | 178 mm² | 276 mm² |

| Transistors | 25,000 million | Not recorded |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB per core | 80 KB per core |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB per core | 512 KB per core |

| L3 Cache | 16 MB shared | 12 MB shared |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR4 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 83.2 GB/s | 51.2 GB/s |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM5 | Intel Socket 1200 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 (Phoenix) | Rocket Lake |

| Release Date | 2024-03-31 | 2021-03-15 |

| Launch MSRP | $170 | $213 |

| Multiplier | Unlocked | Locked |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Part Number | 100-000001591 | SRKNW |