AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G vs Intel Core i5-9400T Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clean sweep for the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G across every Cinebench workload in the head-to-head comparison. The Intel Core i5-9400T does not secure a single win in the six recorded tests, with the AMD part taking all six. The margin is consistent, hovering around 5% in most workloads, which suggests a stable performance advantage rather than a workload-specific anomaly.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G scores 732 against the i5-9400T's 695, a difference of 5.1%. The single-core R15 test shows a similar story: 103 versus 97, a 5.8% gap. Moving to Cinebench R20, the AMD part again leads, scoring 3051 to Intel's 2896 in multi-core, and 430 to 408 in single-core, both again 5.1% apart. The most recent workload, Cinebench R23, follows the exact same pattern: 7266 versus 6896 in multi-core, and 1025 versus 973 in single-core, with the delta again at 5.1%.

What is notable here is the uniformity of the margin. Whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded, and regardless of the Cinebench version, the Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G maintains a lead of roughly 5% over the Core i5-9400T. The largest relative advantage for AMD appears in the R15 single-core test at 5.8%, while the other five tests cluster tightly at 5.1%. This consistency indicates that the performance difference is not tied to scaling across cores or to the specific rendering engine of any one Cinebench version, but rather reflects a general per-clock and per-thread efficiency advantage that persists across all recorded workloads.

The average benchmark score in the database tells a slightly different overall story. The Intel part posts an average score of 2136, while the AMD part averages 2101. That places the i5-9400T at the 47th percentile of all CPUs and the Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G at the 46th percentile. The average scores are drawn from a broader benchmark set than the head-to-head Cinebench tests, which explains why the aggregate picture is so close despite the Ryzen part's consistent Cinebench wins. The Intel chip's nearest rival by average score is the AMD Ryzen 3 5300U at 2135, a 0% delta, while the AMD part's nearest rival is the Intel Core i3-8350K at 2096, a 0.3% delta in favor of the Ryzen. Both chips sit in a dense cluster of comparable desktop and mobile processors, with deltas of less than 1% to their nearest neighbors.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G wins with a score of 7266, compared to the Intel Core i5-9400T's 6896, a 5.1% advantage.

Q: Is the Intel Core i5-9400T ahead in any benchmark?

A: No. In the head-to-head tests, the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G wins all six Cinebench tests. However, the Intel part has a higher average benchmark score overall: 2136 versus 2101.

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-core performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G leads in every single-core test. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 1025 versus 973, a 5.1% edge. In R15 single-core, it scores 103 versus 97, a 5.8% edge.

Q: What is the percentile ranking of each CPU?

A: The Intel Core i5-9400T sits at the 47th percentile of all CPUs, while the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G sits at the 46th percentile.

Q: Which chip is closest to the Intel Core i5-9400T in average score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 5300U, with an average score of 2135 compared to the i5-9400T's 2136, a 0% delta. The AMD Ryzen 5 7520C and Intel Core i7-1160G7 are also close, at 2127 and 2124 respectively.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i5-9400T does not.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Core i5-9400T is built on the Coffee Lake architecture, specifically the Coffee Lake Refresh generation, fabricated by Intel on a 14 nm process. It features 6 physical cores and 6 threads, meaning no hyper-threading is enabled. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G, by contrast, uses the Zen architecture under the Raven Ridge codename, fabricated by GlobalFoundries on the same 14 nm node. It has 4 physical cores and 8 threads, relying on simultaneous multithreading to reach its thread count.

The cache hierarchy differs markedly. The Intel part allocates 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, with 9 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part has a larger per-core L1 at 96 KB and a larger L2 at 512 KB per core, but a much smaller shared L3 pool at just 4 MB. This is a significant architectural divergence: Coffee Lake pairs a large shared L3 with modest per-core caches, while Raven Ridge front-loads its cache budget into the per-core levels.

The integrated graphics also differ. Intel pairs the i5-9400T with the UHD 630 graphics engine, while AMD equips the Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G with the Radeon RX Vega 11. The AMD part also includes an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking, whereas the Intel part is locked. The production status differs as well: the i5-9400T is marked as end-of-life, while the Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G remains active.

The memory controller on the AMD part supports ECC memory, a feature absent from the Intel chip. The PCIe configuration also differs, with the Intel part offering Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the AMD part offers Gen 3 with 8 lanes from the CPU. Both support DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration, though the AMD part has a slightly higher recorded memory bandwidth at 46.9 GB/s versus 42.7 GB/s for the Intel part.

The transistor and die size data are only recorded for the AMD part: 4,950 million transistors on a 210 mm² die. No comparable figures are listed for the Intel chip. The sockets are incompatible: Intel Socket 1151 for the i5-9400T, AMD Socket AM4 for the Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every core specification. The Intel Core i5-9400T has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G has 4 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks are far apart: the Intel chip runs at 1800 MHz, while the AMD chip runs at 3600 MHz. Boost clocks also favor AMD, at 3900 MHz versus 3400 MHz. The TDP ratings differ substantially: the Intel part is rated at 35 watts, the AMD part at 65 watts.

The cache configuration diverges at every level. Intel lists 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 9 MB shared L3. AMD lists 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 4 MB shared L3. Memory bandwidth is recorded at 42.7 GB/s for Intel and 46.9 GB/s for AMD. ECC support is present on AMD, absent on Intel. The Intel part offers 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU; the AMD part offers 8.

The integrated graphics differ: UHD 630 on the Intel side, Radeon RX Vega 11 on the AMD side. The multiplier is unlocked on AMD, locked on Intel. The AMD part carries a recorded transistor count of 4,950 million and a die size of 210 mm², while no such data is recorded for the Intel part. The Intel part is end-of-life, while the AMD part is active. The Intel part's release date is recorded as 2018-08-31, while the AMD part's release date is 2018-05-09. Both use a 14 nm process, but the foundries differ: Intel for the i5-9400T, GlobalFoundries for the Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G wins in every recorded head-to-head benchmark, but the nature of its wins matters for real-world use. Its 5.1% to 5.8% advantage across all Cinebench versions, both single-core and multi-core, makes it the stronger choice for rendering workloads where Cinebench-style performance is representative. The consistent margin, regardless of thread count, suggests that the AMD part's higher clock speeds (3600 MHz base, 3900 MHz boost versus 1800 MHz base, 3400 MHz boost) and its 8 threads give it an edge that holds up even when the Intel part's 6 cores are all active.

The Intel Core i5-9400T, despite losing every head-to-head test, posts a higher average benchmark score of 2136 versus 2101 for the AMD part, and a slightly higher percentile ranking at 47 versus 46. The average score likely reflects a broader benchmark suite beyond Cinebench, and the Intel part's higher average indicates that in some workloads outside the head-to-head set, it pulls ahead. The Intel chip also carries a much lower TDP at 35 watts versus 65 watts, which makes it the more power-efficient option for thermally constrained systems.

For use-case splitting, the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G is the pick for multi-threaded rendering tasks where its consistent 5% lead in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 translates directly to faster completion times. Its 8 threads, unlocked multiplier, and ECC memory support also make it more flexible for workstation-style builds where overclocking or error-correcting memory is desired. The Intel Core i5-9400T, with its 6 physical cores and lower TDP, is better suited to scenarios where power draw is the primary constraint, and its higher average benchmark score suggests it can outperform the AMD part in at least some non-Cinebench workloads. The Intel chip's 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes also give it an advantage for configurations with multiple add-in cards, compared to the AMD part's 8 lanes.