AMD Ryzen 5 8400F vs Intel Core Ultra 9 386H Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and Intel Core Ultra 9 386H represent two distinct approaches to modern processor design, one aimed at the desktop and the other at high-performance mobile systems. The data in the database shows a clear split in their benchmark results, with the Intel part winning 15 of the 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons, while the AMD chip claims two significant victories. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H holds a higher overall percentile ranking at 88 compared to the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F’s 77, and its average benchmark score of 43210 is substantially higher than the 25005 recorded for the AMD processor. These figures indicate the Intel chip is the stronger performer in most measured workloads, but the AMD desktop part demonstrates a notable advantage in specific single-threaded and multi-threaded scenarios.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H dominates the majority of the benchmark suite, winning all but two of the head-to-head tests. Its largest margins come in compute-heavy workloads. The data shows a 73.9% lead over the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F in the PassMark find prime numbers test, a 57.4% advantage in floating point math, and a 56% lead in physics calculations. These results indicate the Intel chip is the better choice for tasks that rely on raw arithmetic throughput and simulation workloads. It also wins every Cinebench multi-core test except one, along with all PassMark integer, encryption, compression, and extended instruction tests.

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F wins two tests, and both are notable for their context. It takes the Cinebench R23 multi-core test with a score of 20851 against 20547 for the Intel chip, a margin of 1.5%. The AMD processor also wins the Cinebench R23 single-core test with a score of 2943 compared to 2071.5 for Intel, a substantial 42.1% lead. This single-core result is the most decisive win for either processor in the entire head-to-head set. The data suggests the AMD chip has a strong advantage in lightly threaded workloads that depend on a single core’s efficiency, while the Intel chip excels in heavily threaded and parallel workloads.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different manufacturing and design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F is built on TSMC’s 4 nm process node and uses the Zen 4 architecture with the Phoenix codename. It is a desktop part for AMD Socket AM5, part of the 8000 series, and features 6 cores and 12 threads. Its base clock is 4.20 GHz with a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, and it has a thermal design power of 65 watts. The chip includes 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. It supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration with a memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s, and it provides PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The processor has no integrated graphics and its multiplier is unlocked, allowing for overclocking. Its launch MSRP is $170.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H is built on Intel’s 3 nm process node and uses the Panther Lake architecture with the Panther Lake-H codename. It is a mobile part designed for Intel BGA 2540, part of the Core Ultra Series 3. It features 16 cores and 16 threads, meaning it does not support simultaneous multithreading. Its base clock is 2.10 GHz with a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, and it has a thermal design power of just 25 watts. The cache configuration is larger per core: 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. It supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory in a dual-channel configuration with a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, which is higher than the AMD chip’s 83.2 GB/s. It provides PCIe Gen 5 with 12 lanes from the CPU, and it includes integrated Intel Xe3 Graphics. The multiplier is locked, so it cannot be overclocked.

These architectural differences explain the benchmark results. The Intel chip’s higher core count of 16 versus 6, combined with its higher boost clock of 4.90 GHz versus 4.70 GHz, supports its strong multi-threaded performance. The AMD chip’s Zen 4 architecture and higher base clock of 4.20 GHz versus 2.10 GHz contribute to its single-core efficiency. The Intel chip’s larger L3 cache of 18 MB versus 16 MB and higher memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s versus 83.2 GB/s also help in memory-intensive workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results show a mixed picture. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H scores 3223 against 2101 for the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F, a 34.8% lead. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Intel chip wins by a narrow 2.5%, scoring 303.5 versus 296. In Cinebench R20, the Intel chip leads by 31.7% in both multi-core and single-core, with scores of 12820 versus 8757 and 1809 versus 1236 respectively. The trend reverses in Cinebench R23. The AMD chip wins multi-core by 1.5%, scoring 20851 versus 20547, and wins single-core by 42.1%, scoring 2943 versus 2071.5. The R23 single-core margin is the largest in the head-to-head set.

The PassMark suite heavily favors the Intel chip. In data compression, Intel scores 352365 against 288158, an 18.2% lead. In data encryption, Intel scores 27150 against 16646, a 38.7% lead. In extended instructions, Intel scores 29138 against 22175, a 23.9% lead. The find prime numbers test shows Intel at 341 against 89, a 73.9% lead. Floating point math shows Intel at 108527 against 46217, a 57.4% lead. Integer math shows Intel at 87284 against 74021, a 15.2% lead. The PassMark multi-thread test shows Intel at 35399 against 24389, a 31.1% lead. Physics shows Intel at 3028 against 1332, a 56% lead. Random string sorting shows Intel at 42135 against 34604, a 17.9% lead. Single-thread performance in PassMark shows Intel at 4218 against 3685, a 12.6% lead.

The Intel chip’s nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385, which scores 43326 with a delta of -0.3%, and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465, which scores 43431 with a delta of -0.5%. The Intel Core i9-12900 and i9-12900KF score 42906 and 42830 respectively, with deltas of 0.7% and 0.9%. The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F’s nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F with a score of 24964 and a delta of 0.2%, the Intel Core i7-11850H with 24935 and 0.3%, and the Intel Core i7-13620H with 24911 and 0.4%. The AMD EPYC 9474F scores 25103 with a delta of -0.4%. These figures place the Intel chip in a higher performance tier, closer to desktop i9-class processors, while the AMD chip sits alongside mid-range desktop and mobile parts.

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H as the stronger processor for most workloads. Its 16 cores, higher boost clock, larger cache, and higher memory bandwidth deliver a clear performance advantage in the majority of tests. The 88th percentile ranking and 43210 average score place it well above the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F, which holds a 77th percentile ranking and a 25005 average score. For multi-threaded tasks such as rendering, physics simulation, encryption, and data compression, the Intel chip is the better performer, often by wide margins such as the 57.4% lead in floating point math and the 73.9% lead in prime number finding.

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F is the better choice for users who prioritize single-core performance. Its 42.1% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core is a decisive result, and it also wins the Cinebench R23 multi-core test, albeit by a narrow 1.5%. The chip’s 65-watt TDP and unlocked multiplier indicate it is designed for desktop systems where overclocking and power headroom are available. The Intel chip’s 25-watt TDP and locked multiplier show it is optimized for mobile efficiency rather than overclocking. The AMD chip also has a lower memory bandwidth at 83.2 GB/s versus 115.2 GB/s, which aligns with its lower performance in memory-heavy PassMark tests. The data indicates the Intel chip is for users who need maximum parallel throughput, while the AMD chip suits those who need a strong single-threaded desktop processor.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F scores 2943 in Cinebench R23 single-core, which is 42.1% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H’s score of 2071.5.

Q: How do the two processors compare in Cinebench R20 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H scores 12820 in Cinebench R20 multi-core, while the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F scores 8757, giving Intel a 31.7% lead.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has 16 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Which processor supports a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H supports 115.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth, while the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F supports 83.2 GB/s.

Q: Does either processor include integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H includes Intel Xe3 Graphics, while the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has no integrated graphics.

Q: Which processor has the higher overall average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has an average benchmark score of 43210, compared to 25005 for the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F. The Intel chip also holds an 88th percentile ranking versus the AMD chip’s 77th percentile.