AMD Ryzen 5 8400F vs Intel Core i7-11850H Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and Intel Core i7-11850H sit at nearly identical overall performance levels, with average benchmark scores of 25005 and 24935 respectively, a difference of just 0.3%. Both processors land in the 77th percentile of all CPUs, and their nearest rival lists are practically interchangeable. Yet the head-to-head benchmark data tells a far more lopsided story: across 17 compared tests, the Ryzen 5 8400F wins every single one. The Intel chip's 8 cores and 16 threads cannot overcome the architectural efficiency of AMD's Zen 4 design, even though the 8400F is a 6-core, 12-thread part. This is a matchup where the scoreboard looks close, but the individual race results are decisive.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results establish the clearest pattern. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ryzen 5 8400F scores 20851 against the Intel Core i7-11850H's 16673, a 25.1% advantage. That same 25.1% delta repeats across every Cinebench iteration: R15 multi-core (2101 vs 1680), R15 single-core (296 vs 237), R20 multi-core (8757 vs 7002), R20 single-core (1236 vs 988), and R23 single-core (2943 vs 2353). The consistency is remarkable — whether the workload is single-threaded or fully loaded, AMD holds exactly the same edge in rendering tasks.

The PassMark suite shows where the gap widens even further. The biggest win for the Ryzen 5 8400F comes in extended instructions, where it scores 22175 versus 15788, a 40.5% margin. Physics tests nearly match that, with the AMD part at 1332 against Intel's 954, a 39.6% difference. Data encryption shows a 36.3% gap (16646 vs 12214), and floating-point math favors AMD by 8.6% (46217 vs 42540). The smaller wins include integer math at 2.8% (74021 vs 71996) and prime number finding at just 2.3% (89 vs 87).

The mid-range results are still decisive. PassMark multi-thread scores 24389 for AMD versus 20059 for Intel, a 21.6% win. Data compression shows the same 21.6% delta at 288158 versus 236949. Random string sorting favors AMD by 21.9% (34604 vs 28395), and single-thread performance is 20.1% higher for the Ryzen (3685 vs 3069). The Intel part never once closes the gap below the 2.3% margin, and in most workloads, the AMD chip is ahead by over 20%. The aggregate numbers may suggest near-parity, but the actual benchmark distribution shows a complete sweep.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental split is process technology and core design. The Ryzen 5 8400F uses TSMC's 4 nm process with a die size of 178 mm² and 25,000 million transistors. The Intel Core i7-11850H is built on Intel's 10 nm process with a 190 mm² die. Smaller process node, smaller die, and a newer design give AMD a substantial efficiency advantage that shows up in the benchmark deltas.

Core configurations differ meaningfully: AMD runs 6 cores and 12 threads, while Intel offers 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel chip has more parallel hardware but still loses every multi-threaded test. Cache allocation also favors Intel in raw capacity — 24 MB shared L3 versus 16 MB shared on AMD, with Intel also having larger per-core L1 (80 KB vs 64 KB) and L2 (1.25 MB vs 1 MB). The AMD part compensates with higher clock speeds: base clock of 4.20 GHz versus 2.10 GHz, though Intel's boost clock of 4.80 GHz edges out AMD's 4.70 GHz.

Memory support is another clear divergence. AMD uses DDR5 with dual-channel support and 83.2 GB/s bandwidth; Intel uses DDR4 with dual-channel support and 51.2 GB/s. That 32 GB/s bandwidth difference helps explain why memory-sensitive workloads like data compression and encryption skew so heavily toward AMD. The Ryzen 5 8400F has no integrated graphics, while the Intel part includes UHD Graphics 750. Both support PCIe Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes. The Intel chip is a mobile part on BGA 1787 with a 35 W TDP, while AMD is a desktop part on Socket AM5 with a 65 W TDP. The AMD processor has an unlocked multiplier; the Intel one does not.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 5 8400F wins everywhere the data measures. For rendering workloads, the 25.1% Cinebench advantage across all versions makes it the clear pick for video editing, 3D modeling, and any CPU-bound creative task. The 40.5% lead in extended instructions and 36.3% lead in data encryption point to strong performance in scientific computing, cryptography, and workloads that leverage modern instruction sets. The 21.6% multi-thread win means general productivity tasks like compilation, batch processing, and multitasking favor AMD.

The Intel Core i7-11850H's case is not built on benchmark wins — it has none in this comparison. Its strengths are contextual rather than performance-based. With 8 cores and 16 threads, it has more raw parallel hardware, which is useful in heavily threaded applications that scale perfectly with core count, though the data shows the 8400F still outperforms it in every tested multithreaded scenario. The Intel part also includes integrated graphics, making it functional without a discrete GPU, which is a practical advantage for mobile systems. Its 35 W TDP suggests lower power draw, which matters for laptop battery life and thermal management. The DDR4 memory support means it can run in systems with older, more affordable memory infrastructure.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F scores 20851 versus the Intel Core i7-11850H's 16673, a 25.1% advantage for AMD.

Q: Does the Intel chip win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. Across all 17 compared tests, the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F wins every one, with margins ranging from 2.3% in prime number finding to 40.5% in extended instructions.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has an average benchmark score of 25005, while the Intel Core i7-11850H scores 24935. The difference is 0.3% in AMD's favor.

Q: What is the core and thread count difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core i7-11850H has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Which processor supports DDR5 memory?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F supports DDR5, with a memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. The Intel Core i7-11850H uses DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does either processor have integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i7-11850H includes UHD Graphics 750. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has no integrated graphics.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification category. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F is a 6-core, 12-thread desktop chip from the 8000 series, built on Zen 4 (Phoenix) architecture using a 4 nm process from TSMC. It has a base clock of 4.20 GHz, boost clock of 4.70 GHz, and a 65 W TDP. It uses AMD Socket AM5, supports DDR5 memory with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth, and has an unlocked multiplier. Its cache includes 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3. It has no integrated graphics.

The Intel Core i7-11850H is an 8-core, 16-thread mobile chip from Core 11th Gen, built on Tiger Lake-H architecture using Intel's 10 nm process. It has a base clock of 2.10 GHz, boost clock of 4.80 GHz, and a 35 W TDP. It uses Intel BGA 1787, supports DDR4 memory with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, and has a locked multiplier. Its cache includes 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 24 MB shared L3. It includes UHD Graphics 750 integrated graphics. The AMD part has a smaller die (178 mm² vs 190 mm²) and was released in 2024, while the Intel chip dates to 2021. The AMD processor has a launch MSRP of $170; the Intel processor has a launch MSRP of $395.

The Verdict

The data leaves no ambiguity for performance-focused buyers. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F is the faster processor in every measured category, with particular dominance in rendering (25.1% across all Cinebench tests), extended instructions (40.5%), and encryption (36.3%). It achieves this despite having fewer cores and threads than the Intel part, which underscores the efficiency of the Zen 4 architecture and the 4 nm process. For anyone building a desktop system where raw CPU performance matters — video editing, 3D rendering, scientific workloads, heavy multitasking — the Ryzen 5 8400F is the correct choice.

The Intel Core i7-11850H is not without a rationale, but that rationale is not performance. It belongs in a laptop or compact mobile system where its 35 W TDP, integrated graphics, and DDR4 support make it a practical option. Its 8 cores provide more parallel hardware on paper, and its 24 MB L3 cache is larger, but neither translates into a benchmark win. The Intel part's higher launch MSRP of $395 versus AMD's $170 further reinforces that the 8400F is the better value proposition, though this comparison focuses strictly on capability. If the workload is fixed and the system is a desktop, the Ryzen 5 8400F wins outright. If the platform is mobile and integrated graphics are required, the Intel chip has a functional niche that the AMD part cannot fill. For all other purposes, the benchmark data points squarely at AMD.