AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS vs Intel Core i5-14490F Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i5-14490F has 10 cores and 16 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds of the two CPUs?

A: The Intel Core i5-14490F boosts to 5.00 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS boosts to 4.90 GHz.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i5-14490F does not.

Q: Do both processors have integrated graphics?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS includes a Radeon 760M integrated GPU. The Intel Core i5-14490F has no integrated graphics.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS has an average benchmark score of 28478, while the Intel Core i5-14490F scores 38149.

Q: How do the two CPUs compare in single-thread performance?

A: The Intel Core i5-14490F leads by 8.1% in the PassMark single-thread test, scoring 3873 versus 3561 for the AMD.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS is built on Zen 4 architecture with the Hawk Point codename, manufactured on a 4 nm process by TSMC. It uses 25,000 million transistors across a 178 mm² die. The Intel Core i5-14490F uses Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-R codename, produced on Intel's 10 nm process with a 215 mm² die size. The Intel chip belongs to the Core 14th Gen series, while the AMD chip is part of the 8000 series.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The AMD processor provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel processor offers 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and a larger 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger L3 cache on the Intel side can benefit workloads that repeatedly access a working set larger than 16 MB.

Memory support separates the two as well. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS supports DDR5 memory only, with dual-channel access and a measured memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel Core i5-14490F supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, also through a dual-channel bus, though the database does not list a bandwidth figure for it. ECC memory is supported on the AMD part, a feature absent on the Intel chip.

PCIe capabilities differ. The AMD processor provides PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The Intel chip provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, which offers higher per-lane bandwidth for compatible devices.

The AMD processor is a mobile part using AMD Socket FP7, with a 28 W TDP. The Intel processor is a desktop part using Intel Socket 1700, with a 65 W TDP. The AMD chip's lower TDP reflects its mobile positioning, while the Intel chip's higher TDP supports sustained desktop performance.

Release dates place the Intel chip earlier, with a recorded release date of 2023-12-31, while the AMD chip was released on 2024-04-15. Both processors are currently listed as active in production. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a consistent pattern across all 17 recorded tests: the Intel Core i5-14490F wins every single comparison. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS records zero wins in the head-to-head table.

Cinebench results show a remarkably uniform margin. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Intel chip scores 2318 against 1824 for AMD, a 21.3% advantage. Cinebench R15 singlecore shows the Intel chip at 327 versus 257, again a 21.4% lead. The same 21.3% delta appears in Cinebench R20 multicore (9660 versus 7603) and Cinebench R20 singlecore (1363 versus 1073). Cinebench R23 continues the pattern: multicore shows 23000 for Intel versus 18104 for AMD, and singlecore shows 3247 versus 2555, both at a 21.3% difference.

The consistency across Cinebench versions indicates the Intel chip holds a stable advantage in both single-threaded and multi-threaded rendering workloads. The singlecore and multicore margins are nearly identical, suggesting the per-core performance gap is the primary driver rather than core count scaling alone.

PassMark tests reveal a wider range of margins. The largest Intel advantage appears in PassMark physics, where the Intel chip scores 2093 against 1043 for AMD, a 50.2% lead. This test appears highly sensitive to the architectural and core-count differences between the two parts.

PassMark floating point math shows a 35.4% Intel advantage, with scores of 66558 versus 43019. The Intel chip also leads by 41.8% in PassMark find prime numbers (122 versus 71) and by 27.5% in data compression (340026 versus 246446).

More moderate gaps appear in other tests. PassMark data encryption shows a 17.9% Intel lead (18225 versus 14962). PassMark integer math records a 20.5% advantage for Intel (87844 versus 69839). PassMark multithread shows a 25.1% gap (28662 versus 21465).

The smallest margins are found in single-threaded tests. PassMark single thread shows the Intel chip at 3873 versus 3561 for AMD, an 8.1% lead. PassMark random string sorting shows a 15.1% Intel advantage (35608 versus 30235). PassMark extended instructions records a 14.8% gap (21731 versus 18507).

The average benchmark scores reinforce the overall picture. The Intel Core i5-14490F averages 38149 across all benchmarks, placing it in the 86th percentile of all CPUs. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS averages 28478, placing it in the 80th percentile. The Intel chip's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T (0.1% behind), the Intel Core i5-13600KF (0.1% ahead), the AMD Ryzen 7 250 (0.2% behind), and the Intel Core i5-13600HX (0.3% behind). The AMD chip's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon E-2436 (0.2% behind), the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850HS (0.2% behind), the Intel Core 5 220H (0.3% behind), and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850U (0.3% ahead).

These rival comparisons show that the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS sits in a competitive cluster around the 28500 average score mark, while the Intel Core i5-14490F competes in a higher tier around 38150.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Core i5-14490F holds an advantage in every recorded benchmark, with margins ranging from 8.1% in single-threaded PassMark to 50.2% in PassMark physics. The Cinebench suite shows a uniform 21.3% lead across all versions and both single and multi-threaded tests, indicating a consistent per-core performance advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS does not win a single head-to-head test. Its strengths lie elsewhere: ECC memory support, integrated Radeon 760M graphics, a lower 28 W TDP, and a smaller 178 mm² die on a 4 nm process. For mobile systems where integrated graphics and power efficiency matter, the AMD part provides capabilities the Intel chip lacks entirely. The Intel Core i5-14490F has no integrated graphics, which requires a discrete GPU in any system using it.

For desktop builds with a dedicated graphics card, the Intel Core i5-14490F delivers substantially higher performance across rendering, math, compression, and encryption workloads. Its 10 cores and 16 threads provide more parallel capacity than the AMD chip's 6 cores and 12 threads, and its higher boost clock of 5.00 GHz contributes to the single-thread lead.

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS suits portable systems where the 28 W TDP, integrated graphics, and ECC support are decisive factors. The Intel Core i5-14490F suits desktop systems where raw performance in multi-threaded and single-threaded tasks takes priority and a discrete GPU is already present. The database shows no scenario in which the AMD chip outperforms the Intel chip on raw compute metrics.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS | Intel Core i5-14490F |

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

| Cores | 6 | 10 |

| Threads | 12 | 16 |

| Base clock | 3.50 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.90 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP7 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Raptor Lake |

| Process node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Die size | 178 mm² | 215 mm² |

| L1 cache | 64 KB per core | 80 KB per core |

| L2 cache | 1 MB per core | 1.25 MB per core |

| L3 cache | 16 MB shared | 24 MB shared |

| Memory support | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | Not listed |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 lanes | Gen 5, 16 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon 760M | N/A |

| Market segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release date | 2024-04-15 | 2023-12-31 |

The Intel chip uses a higher base clock of 2.50 GHz, though the AMD chip starts at 3.50 GHz. The boost clocks are close, with Intel at 5.00 GHz and AMD at 4.90 GHz. The Intel chip carries a 65 W TDP versus 28 W for AMD, reflecting different thermal and power design targets for desktop versus mobile platforms.

The AMD processor supports ECC memory, which the Intel chip does not. The Intel chip supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the AMD chip is limited to DDR5. PCIe generation differs, with Intel offering Gen 5 lanes and AMD offering Gen 4 lanes, though the AMD chip provides more total lanes at 20 versus 16.

The AMD chip includes a Radeon 760M integrated GPU, making it a complete solution for systems without a discrete graphics card. The Intel chip has no integrated graphics, requiring external graphics hardware. These specification differences align with the performance results, where the Intel chip's higher core count, larger caches, and higher boost clock translate into superior benchmark scores across all 17 tests.