AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 vs Intel Core i5-10400H Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data divides cleanly along workload type, but the winner is consistent: the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 takes every recorded head-to-head benchmark. Out of six comparisons in the database, the AMD part wins all six, with the Intel Core i5-10400H recording zero wins. That is not a narrow victory; it is a sweep across both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads.

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 wins in every Cinebench generation recorded. In Cinebench R15 multicore, it scores 782 against Intel's 697, a 10.9% advantage. The single-core R15 result shows the same margin: 110 versus 98, again 10.9% in AMD's favor. Moving to Cinebench R20, the AMD part scores 3261 multicore versus 2908, and 460 single-core versus 410. Both deltas sit at 10.8% and 10.9% respectively. Cinebench R23 repeats the pattern: 7766 versus 6924 multicore (10.8% ahead) and 1096 versus 977 single-core (10.9% ahead).

For the Intel part, the story is not about winning any benchmark but about where it remains competitive. Its Geekbench results are recorded only for the Intel side: 5000 multicore and 1413 single-core. These scores place it in the same percentile band as the AMD chip, with both parts at the 47th percentile among all CPUs in the database. The average benchmark score tells a similar story: Intel averages 2303, AMD averages 2246. That puts the Intel chip slightly ahead on aggregate average, despite losing every head-to-head Cinebench test.

The use-case split is therefore unusual. If the workload is Cinebench rendering, the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 is the stronger part across every version and every thread count. If the workload is represented by Geekbench, the Intel part has recorded scores that suggest competitive general-purpose performance, though no direct AMD Geekbench result exists in the head-to-head table for comparison. The database shows that the AMD part wins all six direct comparisons, while the Intel part holds a marginal edge in the overall average benchmark score because Geekbench results are included in its average but not in the AMD average.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies and target different market segments. The Intel Core i5-10400H is a mobile processor on Intel BGA 1440, part of the Comet Lake-H generation built on Intel's 14 nm process. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 is a desktop processor on AMD Socket AM4, built on the Zen architecture (Summit Ridge) and manufactured by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm process. Both use the same process node, but the similarities end there.

Core counts match: both have 4 cores and 8 threads. Clock speeds differ substantially. The Intel part has a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The AMD part has a higher base clock of 3.50 GHz but a much lower boost clock of 3.70 GHz. The Intel chip therefore has a 0.90 GHz higher maximum boost, while the AMD chip runs 0.90 GHz higher at base. Despite that Intel boost advantage, the AMD part wins every Cinebench test, which suggests that the AMD architecture extracts more performance per clock in these workloads, or that the mobile thermal envelope of the Intel part limits sustained boost behavior.

Cache hierarchies differ significantly. The Intel part has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3. The AMD part has 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. That gives the AMD chip 50% more L1 per core, double the L2 per core, and nearly three times the L3 capacity. For cache-sensitive workloads, the AMD part has a structural advantage.

Memory support also differs. The Intel part supports DDR3 and DDR4 in dual-channel configuration with a recorded memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s. The AMD part supports DDR4 in dual-channel, with no bandwidth figure recorded in the database. The Intel part includes integrated UHD Graphics; the AMD part has no integrated graphics listed. The Intel part does not support ECC memory, and neither does the AMD part. PCIe generation is listed as Gen 3 for Intel, with no PCIe field recorded for AMD.

The AMD part has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel part is locked. That makes the AMD chip more flexible for overclocking on AM4 boards, though the database does not record any overclocked results. The AMD die is 192 mm² with 4,800 million transistors; no die size or transistor count is recorded for Intel. The Intel part was released in 2020, while the AMD part was released in 2017. Both remain listed as active production parts.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head table in the database records six Cinebench comparisons, and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 wins all six. The margins are remarkably consistent, hovering near 10.8% to 10.9% across every test. This consistency suggests the advantage is architectural rather than workload-specific.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the AMD part scores 782 against 697, a delta of 10.9%. In single-core R15, the scores are 110 versus 98, also a 10.9% delta. The pattern holds in R20: multicore 3261 versus 2908 (10.8%), single-core 460 versus 410 (10.9%). In R23, multicore 7766 versus 6924 (10.8%) and single-core 1096 versus 977 (10.9%). The AMD part wins by nearly the same percentage in every generation and in both single and multi-threaded modes.

The Intel part's best showing relative to its average comes from Geekbench, where it records 5000 multicore and 1413 single-core. These scores are not part of the head-to-head table, so they do not affect the win count, but they do contribute to the Intel average of 2303, which is higher than the AMD average of 2246. The AMD part's average is computed from its six Cinebench results, which are all higher than Intel's corresponding Cinebench scores. The Intel average benefits from the inclusion of Geekbench scores that have no direct AMD counterpart in the database.

In terms of nearest rivals, the Intel Core i5-10400H sits among Intel Xeon and older Ryzen parts. Its closest rival by average score is the Intel Core i7-8809G at 2307, a 0.2% difference, and the Intel Xeon E-2134 at 2319, a 0.7% difference. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-10710U at 2248 (0.1% difference) and the Intel Core i5-9400 at 2254 (0.4% difference). Both chips occupy the same percentile band, 47th among all CPUs, reinforcing that these are similarly positioned parts despite the AMD sweep in direct comparisons.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most direct benchmark comparisons?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 wins all six head-to-head Cinebench comparisons in the database, while the Intel Core i5-10400H wins zero.

Q: How large is the AMD advantage in Cinebench R23?

A: In Cinebench R23 multicore, the AMD part scores 7766 versus 6924, a 10.8% advantage. In single-core, it scores 1096 versus 977, a 10.9% advantage.

Q: Does the Intel part have any benchmark where it leads?

A: The Intel part has a higher average benchmark score of 2303 versus 2246 for AMD, but this is driven by Geekbench results that are not present in the AMD benchmark list. In every direct head-to-head Cinebench test, the AMD part leads.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: Both processors have 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The Intel Core i5-10400H has a 2.60 GHz base clock and a 4.60 GHz boost clock. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 has a 3.50 GHz base clock and a 3.70 GHz boost clock.

Q: Which processor has more cache?

A: The AMD part has 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The Intel part has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3.

Q: Are both processors still in production?

A: Yes, both are listed as active production parts.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion: the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 is the faster processor in every direct comparison recorded. It wins all six Cinebench tests across three generations, with margins between 10.8% and 10.9%. That consistency is notable because it spans both single-core and multi-core workloads, which usually respond to different architectural strengths. The AMD part achieves this despite a much lower boost clock (3.70 GHz versus 4.60 GHz) and a lower average benchmark score (2246 versus 2303). The higher Intel average comes from Geekbench scores that have no AMD counterpart in the database, so it should not be read as evidence of Intel superiority in head-to-head workloads.

The Intel Core i5-10400H is a mobile part with integrated UHD Graphics, DDR3 and DDR4 support, and a 45 W TDP. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 is a desktop part with no integrated graphics, a 65 W TDP, and an unlocked multiplier. The Intel part is the better choice for a mobile platform that needs integrated graphics and lower power draw. The AMD part is the better choice for a desktop build where raw Cinebench performance matters and the user has a discrete GPU.

For buyers who prioritize rendering performance, the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 is the data-backed pick. It wins every recorded rendering benchmark by roughly 11%. For buyers who need a mobile processor with integrated graphics and are willing to accept lower Cinebench scores, the Intel Core i5-10400H is the only one of the two that fits that use case, since the AMD part has no integrated graphics and uses a desktop socket. The average benchmark scores place both at the 47th percentile, so neither is a high-end part, but within this pairing, AMD is the performance leader.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-10400H | AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1500 |

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

| Base clock | 2.60 GHz | 3.50 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.60 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 65 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1440 | AMD Socket AM4 |

| Architecture | Comet Lake | Zen |

| Codename | Comet Lake-H | Zen (Summit Ridge) |

| Process node | 14 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 4,800 million |

| Die size | Not recorded | 192 mm² |

| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 96 KB (per core) |

| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 6 MB (shared) | 16 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR3, DDR4 | DDR4 |

| Memory bandwidth | 46.9 GB/s | Not recorded |

| PCIe | Gen 3 | Not recorded |

| Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics | None |

| Market segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release date | 2020-04-01 | 2017-06-28 |

| Multiplier unlocked | No | Yes |

| Part number | SRH8R | YD150BBBM4GAE |

| Cinebench R15 multicore | 697 | 782 |

| Cinebench R15 single-core | 98 | 110 |

| Cinebench R20 multicore | 2908 | 3261 |

| Cinebench R20 single-core | 410 | 460 |

| Cinebench R23 multicore | 6924 | 7766 |

| Cinebench R23 single-core | 977 | 1096 |

| Geekbench multicore | 5000 | Not recorded |

| Geekbench single-core | 1413 | Not recorded |

| Average benchmark score | 2303 | 2246 |

| Percentile vs all CPUs | 47 | 47 |