AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400GE vs Intel Core i3-9100F Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400GE and Intel Core i3-9100F are both 4-core desktop processors, but they represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The Ryzen PRO is a 35W APU with simultaneous multithreading and integrated graphics, while the Core i3 is a 65W, 4-thread part with no iGPU. Benchmark data shows a consistent pattern: the AMD chip wins every single head-to-head Cinebench test, despite the Intel chip's higher clock speeds. This analysis explores where each processor excels, what the architectural differences mean, and why the lower-clocked AMD part dominates the benchmark suite.

Where Each One Wins

The data presents a clear and unambiguous picture: the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400GE wins all six head-to-head benchmark comparisons. There is no benchmark category in which the Intel Core i3-9100F takes the lead. The AMD processor’s wins are substantial, with deltas ranging from 15.9% to 16.3% across all Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 tests. This means the Ryzen PRO 2400GE is roughly 16% faster than the Core i3-9100F in both single-core and multi-core rendering workloads.

The Intel Core i3-9100F does have additional Geekbench scores in its benchmark list, but these are not part of the direct head-to-head comparison. However, its raw benchmark data shows a multi-core score of 3962 and a single-core score of 1378 in Geekbench, while the AMD parts’ Geekbench results are absent from the data. The Intel chip’s wins are therefore limited to tests that were not run against the AMD competitor, which does little to establish an advantage in the direct comparison.

The Ryzen PRO’s dominance is comprehensive. It wins the multicore tests by virtue of its 8 threads versus the Intel’s 4 threads, and it wins the single-core tests despite a lower base clock (3.20 GHz vs 3.60 GHz) and lower boost clock (3.80 GHz vs 4.20 GHz). This suggests that the AMD architecture’s efficiency per clock cycle is significantly higher, or that the benchmark environment favors the AMD processor’s design. For workloads like video rendering, 3D modeling, and code compilation, the Ryzen PRO 2400GE is the clear choice based on the numbers.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on different architectural foundations. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400GE uses the Zen architecture, codenamed Raven Ridge, manufactured on a 14 nm process by GlobalFoundries. It is part of the 2000 series and represents a generation labeled "Ryzen 5 (Zen (Raven Ridge))". In contrast, the Intel Core i3-9100F uses the Coffee Lake architecture, specifically Coffee Lake Refresh, also on a 14 nm process but manufactured by Intel.

The core configurations differ significantly. The AMD chip has 4 cores and 8 threads, enabling simultaneous multithreading. The Intel chip also has 4 cores but only 4 threads, lacking Hyper-Threading. This thread count disparity is a primary reason for the AMD chip’s multicore advantage. The cache hierarchies also differ: the AMD part has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and a larger 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

The memory subsystems are similar in type—both support DDR4 dual-channel memory—but the AMD chip has a higher theoretical memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s versus the Intel’s 38.4 GB/s. The PCIe configurations also differ: the AMD offers Gen 3 with 8 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel offers Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The most glaring difference is the integrated graphics: the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400GE includes a Radeon RX Vega 11 iGPU, while the Intel Core i3-9100F has no integrated graphics at all. The AMD chip also has a 35W TDP versus the Intel’s 65W TDP, making the AMD part more power-efficient despite its performance lead.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core rendering?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400GE is significantly faster. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 6606 versus the Intel Core i3-9100F’s 5697, a 16% advantage. Similar margins are seen in Cinebench R20 (2774 vs 2392) and R15 (665 vs 574).

Q: Does the Intel Core i3-9100F win any benchmark outright?

A: No. In the head-to-head data, the Intel chip wins zero tests. The AMD processor wins all six Cinebench comparisons, with delta percentages ranging from 15.9% to 16.3%.

Q: Why does the AMD chip win single-core tests despite lower clock speeds?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400GE has a boost clock of 3.80 GHz, while the Intel Core i3-9100F boosts to 4.20 GHz. Despite this 0.40 GHz deficit, the AMD chip wins Cinebench R23 single-core with 932 points versus 804 points, a 15.9% lead, indicating higher instructions per clock (IPC) efficiency.

Q: Can the Intel Core i3-9100F be used without a discrete graphics card?

A: No. The Intel Core i3-9100F has no integrated graphics (integratedGraphics is null). The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400GE, however, includes a Radeon RX Vega 11 iGPU, allowing for a system to be built without a separate graphics card.

Q: Which processor has more threads, and how does that matter?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400GE has 8 threads, while the Intel Core i3-9100F has 4 threads. This doubling of threads allows the AMD processor to handle parallel workloads more efficiently, which is reflected in its 16% multi-core benchmark advantage.

Q: What is the production status of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400GE is listed as "Active" in production, while the Intel Core i3-9100F is listed as "End-of-life".

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across several key specification fields. The most consequential differences are in threads, TDP, and integrated graphics. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400GE has 8 threads, a 35W TDP, and includes a Radeon RX Vega 11 iGPU. The Intel Core i3-9100F has 4 threads, a 65W TDP, and no integrated graphics.

Clock speeds also differ, with the Intel chip holding the advantage: 3.60 GHz base and 4.20 GHz boost, versus the AMD’s 3.20 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost. The cache layout is different as well, with the AMD chip having larger per-core L1 (96 KB vs 64 KB) and L2 (512 KB vs 256 KB), but the Intel chip having a larger shared L3 cache (6 MB vs 4 MB). Memory bandwidth favors the AMD chip at 46.9 GB/s versus 38.4 GB/s. The PCIe lane count favors the Intel chip with 16 lanes versus 8 lanes, both Gen 3.

The physical and manufacturing details also differ. The AMD chip has a die size of 210 mm² and 4,950 million transistors, fabricated by GlobalFoundries. The Intel chip has a smaller die size of 126 mm², with no transistor count listed, fabricated by Intel. The sockets are incompatible: AMD uses Socket AM4, while Intel uses Socket 1151. The release dates are also different, with the AMD launching on 2018-05-09 and the Intel on 2019-04-22. The Intel chip has a launch MSRP of $122, while the AMD chip has no MSRP listed. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is remarkably consistent, showing the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400GE with a near-uniform 16% advantage across all tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD wins 665 to 574, a delta of 15.9%. In the single-core R15 test, the AMD wins 93 to 80, a delta of 16.3%. This pattern repeats in Cinebench R20, where the AMD wins multi-core 2774 to 2392 (16% delta) and single-core 391 to 337 (16% delta).

The most recent Cinebench R23 tests confirm the trend. In multi-core, the AMD scores 6606 versus the Intel’s 5697, a 16% delta. In single-core, the AMD scores 932 versus 804, a 15.9% delta. The consistency of these deltas across different benchmark versions and workload types (single vs multi-threaded) suggests a fundamental architectural efficiency advantage for the AMD Zen design, rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The Intel Core i3-9100F does have a Geekbench multi-core score of 3962 and a single-core score of 1378, but these are not compared directly against the AMD processor in the head-to-head data. The absence of AMD Geekbench scores in the pack means we cannot draw a direct comparison there. However, the six Cinebench tests that are available for comparison all point decisively in favor of the AMD processor. The biggest single win for the AMD chip is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where it achieves a 16.3% delta over the Intel chip, while the other five tests all hover near 16%.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear verdict for most desktop workloads: the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400GE is the superior processor. It wins every benchmark it is tested against, with a consistent 16% performance advantage over the Intel Core i3-9100F in both single-threaded and multi-threaded Cinebench tests. This performance lead is achieved while consuming less power (35W TDP vs 65W) and including an integrated Radeon RX Vega 11 GPU, which the Intel part completely lacks.

The Intel Core i3-9100F’s only advantages are a higher base and boost clock, a larger L3 cache, and more PCIe lanes (16 vs 8). However, these specification advantages do not translate into benchmark wins. The Intel chip’s higher clock speeds and larger cache cannot overcome the AMD chip’s superior IPC and thread count. The Intel part also has a listed launch MSRP of $122, but pricing should not be considered as a metric for this analysis.

For a user building a system without a discrete GPU, the choice is obvious: the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400GE is the only viable option of the two, given the Intel chip has no integrated graphics. For users with a discrete GPU, the AMD chip still offers a 16% performance advantage in rendering workloads. The Intel chip’s end-of-life production status also suggests it is a legacy part, while the AMD chip remains active. Based on the benchmark data, the Ryzen 5 PRO 2400GE is the recommended choice for any workload that is represented by Cinebench. The data offers no benchmark-based reason to select the Intel Core i3-9100F over the AMD alternative.