AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1600 vs Intel Core i7-9850H Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1600 wins every single benchmark in this head-to-head, but the Intel Core i7-9850H still has a crucial role in mobile systems. The performance gap between them is consistent, sitting at roughly 8.5-8.7% across all tested workloads, yet both CPUs land at the 51st percentile of all processors. This means the Ryzen PRO 1600's edge is real but not transformative, and the choice between them hinges on platform and form factor rather than raw performance superiority.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1600 beats the Intel Core i7-9850H in all six shared benchmark tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, AMD scores 1013 against Intel's 925, a deficit of 8.7% for the i7. The single-core R15 test shows the same pattern: 142 for AMD versus 130 for Intel, an 8.5% gap. These are not margin-of-error differences; they represent a consistent architectural advantage for the Zen-based chip.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the Ryzen 5 PRO 1600 again leads by 8.7% in multi-core (4224 vs 3856) and 8.6% in single-core (595 vs 544). The R23 results mirror this exactly: AMD scores 10058 multi-core and 1419 single-core, compared to Intel's 9182 and 1296. Every single test — six of six — goes to AMD with a delta between 8.5% and 8.7%. There are no workloads in this suite where the Intel part pulls ahead, even momentarily.

What is more revealing is that the i7-9850H has a massive clock advantage on paper — a 4.60 GHz boost versus 3.60 GHz for the Ryzen — yet still loses. The Intel chip's higher boost clock cannot overcome the Ryzen's superior per-core efficiency in these benchmarks. The Ryzen's 3.20 GHz base clock is also higher than Intel's 2.60 GHz, suggesting the AMD part operates at a more sustained performance level. The average benchmark score tells a similar story: Intel's average is 2934, AMD's is 2909, nearly identical, but the head-to-head tests show AMD consistently ahead. This is because the average includes Geekbench scores where Intel performs relatively better (6087 multi-core, 1449 single-core), while the Cinebench suite is uniformly AMD-favorable.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies and use different fabrication facilities, despite both being built on a 14 nm process node. The Intel Core i7-9850H uses Coffee Lake architecture, specifically the Coffee Lake-HR refresh, and is fabricated by Intel. Its die size is 149 mm². In contrast, the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1600 is built on the original Zen architecture (Summit Ridge) and is fabricated by GlobalFoundries, with a substantially larger die at 192 mm² and 4,800 million transistors.

Cache configurations differ significantly. Intel allocates 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. AMD provides 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. This means the Ryzen has 50% more L1 cache per core, double the L2 per core, and 33% more total L3 cache. That extra cache likely explains part of the Ryzen's consistent benchmark lead, as more data can be held closer to the cores.

The platform context is entirely different. Intel's i7-9850H is a mobile processor on the Intel BGA 1440 socket, meaning it is soldered directly to the motherboard. It includes integrated UHD Graphics 630, making it a complete chip for laptops. AMD's Ryzen 5 PRO 1600 is a desktop part on Socket AM4, with no integrated graphics at all — it requires a discrete GPU. The Intel part has a 45 W TDP, while the AMD part draws 65 W, reflecting the desktop's larger thermal budget. Memory support is DDR4 dual-channel for both, but Intel lists a specific memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, while AMD does not provide a figure. Neither supports ECC memory, and both lack any 3D V-Cache. The Intel chip is end-of-life, while the AMD part remains in active production.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1600 wins with a score of 10058 versus Intel's 9182, a margin of 8.7%.

Q: Does the Intel Core i7-9850H win any benchmark in this comparison?

A: No. The data shows AMD winning all six head-to-head tests, with Intel losing by between 8.5% and 8.7% in each one. Intel's wins are zero.

Q: How do their single-core scores compare?

A: AMD leads in single-core as well. In Cinebench R23, AMD scores 1419 to Intel's 1296. The R15 and R20 single-core tests also favor AMD, at 142 vs 130 and 595 vs 544 respectively.

Q: Are these processors on the same socket?

A: No. The Intel i7-9850H uses the Intel BGA 1440 socket and is a mobile chip, while the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1600 uses the AMD Socket AM4 and is a desktop processor. They are not interchangeable.

Q: Which chip has integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Core i7-9850H includes integrated graphics, specifically UHD Graphics 630. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1600 has no integrated graphics and requires a separate GPU.

Q: What is the TDP difference between them?

A: The Intel part has a 45 W TDP, while the AMD part has a 65 W TDP. The AMD chip consumes more power, which is consistent with its desktop design and larger 192 mm² die.

The Verdict

Choose the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1600 if you are building a desktop system and prioritize raw benchmark performance. The data shows it ahead in every tested workload, with a consistent 8.5-8.7% edge across all Cinebench versions. Its larger cache hierarchy — 16 MB of L3 versus 12 MB, and 512 KB of L2 per core versus 256 KB — appears to deliver tangible results. The unlocked multiplier also means it can be overclocked, though no overclocking benchmarks are in the data. It is still in active production, so availability should be less of a concern.

Choose the Intel Core i7-9850H only if your use case requires a mobile form factor. It is a soldered BGA chip designed for laptops, and its integrated UHD Graphics 630 means it can run without a discrete GPU. However, the benchmark results show it is slower in every measured category, and its 45 W TDP does not translate into performance superiority. It is also end-of-life, which may affect long-term availability. The decision is not about performance — AMD wins outright — but about whether you need a desktop or mobile platform.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every platform-level specification, beyond just performance. The Intel Core i7-9850H has a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1600 has a base of 3.20 GHz and a boost of 3.60 GHz. Intel's TDP is 45 W; AMD's is 65 W. Intel uses the BGA 1440 socket; AMD uses Socket AM4. Intel's architecture is Coffee Lake; AMD's is Zen. Intel's die is 149 mm² from its own foundry; AMD's die is 192 mm² from GlobalFoundries, with 4,800 million transistors. Intel has 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, with 12 MB L3; AMD has 96 KB L1 and 512 KB L2 per core, with 16 MB L3. Intel includes UHD Graphics 630; AMD has none. Intel's memory bandwidth is listed at 42.7 GB/s; AMD's is not specified. Intel's market segment is mobile and it is end-of-life; AMD's is desktop and it is active. Intel's multiplier is locked; AMD's is unlocked. Finally, Intel's release date is 2019-04-22, while AMD's is 2017-06-28.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 1600 wins in multi-threaded workloads, as evidenced by Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests, where it leads by 8.7% consistently. It also wins in single-threaded performance, leading by 8.5-8.7% across the same suite. This makes it the better choice for CPU-bound tasks like video rendering, 3D modeling, and any application that scales with cache size, given its 33% larger L3 cache. It also suits users who want an unlocked multiplier for potential overclocking.

The Intel Core i7-9850H wins in no benchmark in this comparison, but it wins in platform flexibility for mobile users. Its integrated UHD Graphics 630 allows for a system without a discrete GPU, which is critical for thin-and-light laptops. Its lower 45 W TDP is better suited for battery-powered devices, and its BGA 1440 socket is designed for compact, soldered motherboards. The higher 4.60 GHz boost clock could theoretically benefit workloads that are extremely latency-sensitive, but the data shows no such benefit in the Cinebench suite. For any measurable performance metric, AMD is the winner; Intel's only advantage is the mobile ecosystem it occupies.