AMD Ryzen 7 1700 vs Intel Core i5-8400H Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the majority of the head-to-head benchmark comparisons?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 1700 wins three of the four head-to-head benchmarks, with victories in Cinebench R15 multi-core, Cinebench R15 single-core, and Geekbench multi-core. The Intel Core i5-8400H wins only one test, Geekbench single-core.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap in Cinebench R15?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 1700 scores 1414 points versus 644 points for the Intel Core i5-8400H, representing a 119.6% advantage for the AMD part. This is the largest delta in any benchmark between the two processors.

Q: Does the Intel part have any single-core advantage?

A: Yes, but only in Geekbench. The Intel Core i5-8400H scores 1281 in Geekbench single-core versus 1023 for the AMD Ryzen 7 1700, a 20.1% lead. Notably, in Cinebench R15 single-core, the AMD part actually wins with 147 points versus 90 points for the Intel chip.

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

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 1700 has an average benchmark score of 2015, while the Intel Core i5-8400H has an average of 2003. Both processors sit at the 45th percentile among all CPUs.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 1700 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core i5-8400H has 4 cores and 8 threads. This gives the AMD part a 2x advantage in both core count and thread count.

Q: What are the production statuses of these two chips?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 1700 is listed as "Active" production status, while the Intel Core i5-8400H is marked as "End-of-life." The AMD chip is a desktop part, whereas the Intel chip targets the mobile segment.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 7 1700 is built on the Zen architecture, codenamed Summit Ridge, using a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die. The Intel Core i5-8400H uses the Coffee Lake-H architecture, also on a 14 nm process but fabricated by Intel, with a significantly smaller die size of 126 mm². The AMD part has a larger L1 cache at 96 KB per core versus 64 KB per core for Intel, and its L2 cache is double at 512 KB per core versus 256 KB. L3 cache also favors AMD: 16 MB shared versus 12 MB shared on the Intel chip.

The core configuration differs fundamentally. The Ryzen 7 1700 offers 8 cores and 16 threads, while the i5-8400H offers half that: 4 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks are 3.00 GHz for AMD and 2.50 GHz for Intel, but the boost clock reverses the order — Intel reaches 4.10 GHz versus 3.70 GHz for AMD. Thermal design power also diverges: the Ryzen 7 1700 is rated at 65 W, while the i5-8400H draws 45 W. The AMD chip supports ECC memory and uses a dual-channel DDR4 memory bus with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth; the Intel part supports DDR4 but its memory bus width and bandwidth are not specified in the data.

Socket and platform details separate these parts entirely. AMD uses Socket AM4 with 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, and the multiplier is unlocked for overclocking. Intel uses BGA 1440, has no listed PCIe lane count, and the multiplier is locked. The Ryzen 7 1700 has no integrated graphics, while the i5-8400H includes Intel UHD 630 graphics. The AMD chip launched in March 2017 with a launch MSRP of $329; the Intel part launched in April 2018 with no MSRP listed. The AMD processor is a desktop part with active production status; the Intel processor is a mobile part that is end-of-life.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data paints a lopsided picture in favor of the AMD Ryzen 7 1700, but with one notable exception. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD chip scores 1414 against 644 for the Intel part — a 119.6% advantage. This is the single largest margin in the comparison and reflects the AMD part's doubling of cores and threads. The 8-core/16-thread configuration simply overwhelms the 4-core/8-thread Intel chip in heavily threaded workloads.

Cinebench R15 single-core is more surprising. The AMD Ryzen 7 1700 scores 147, while the Intel Core i5-8400H scores 90. The AMD part leads by 63.3% in this test, despite the Intel chip having a higher boost clock of 4.10 GHz versus 3.70 GHz. This suggests that the Zen architecture's per-core efficiency at the time outperformed Coffee Lake in this specific rendering workload, or that the Intel chip's thermal/power constraints in a mobile package limited its sustained performance.

Geekbench multi-core again favors AMD, with the Ryzen 7 1700 scoring 5475 versus 3656 for the i5-8400H. The 49.8% delta is substantial but smaller than the Cinebench R15 multi-core gap, indicating that Geekbench's workload scaling is less sensitive to core count differences. Still, the AMD part maintains a clear lead in multi-threaded performance across both benchmark suites.

The Intel Core i5-8400H takes its only win in Geekbench single-core, scoring 1281 against 1023 for the AMD chip. The 20.1% advantage here aligns with the Intel part's higher boost clock and the typical single-thread performance lead of Coffee Lake over first-generation Zen. Interestingly, this single-core win in Geekbench does not translate to Cinebench R15 single-core, where AMD wins by a wide margin. This discrepancy highlights that single-core performance is workload-dependent and not a monolithic attribute.

Looking at the overall benchmark averages, the two processors are essentially tied. The AMD Ryzen 7 1700 averages 2015, and the Intel Core i5-8400H averages 2003 — a difference of only 12 points, or roughly 0.6%. Both sit at the 45th percentile of all CPUs. The nearest rivals for each chip reinforce this parity: the AMD part's closest competitors include the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1807B (0.2% higher score) and the Intel Core i5-8300H (0.5% lower), while the Intel chip's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 2800H (0.1% higher) and the Intel Core i5-8400T (0.1% lower). In aggregate performance, these two chips are virtually indistinguishable despite their very different architectural approaches.

The Verdict

The data directs a clear split decision based on workload type. For multi-threaded applications — rendering, encoding, compilation, or any task that scales with core count — the AMD Ryzen 7 1700 is the decisive choice. Its 119.6% lead in Cinebench R15 multi-core and 49.8% lead in Geekbench multi-core are not marginal differences; they represent a doubling of throughput in the most demanding scenarios. The 8-core/16-thread configuration is the primary driver, and no amount of single-core tuning on the Intel side compensates for having half the cores.

For single-thread-sensitive workloads, the picture is mixed but slightly favors Intel in one key test. The Intel Core i5-8400H leads by 20.1% in Geekbench single-core, which could matter for lightly threaded applications or tasks with strict latency requirements. However, the AMD chip actually wins Cinebench R15 single-core by 63.3%, so the Intel advantage is not universal across all single-threaded benchmarks. A user prioritizing Geekbench-style single-core performance would lean toward Intel, but a user running Cinebench-style single-threaded rendering would prefer AMD.

Platform considerations further separate the two. The AMD Ryzen 7 1700 uses Socket AM4 with an unlocked multiplier, offering overclocking headroom and a desktop form factor with active production status. The Intel Core i5-8400H is a locked mobile part in BGA 1440 with integrated UHD 630 graphics and end-of-life status. For a desktop build where upgradability and tuning matter, the AMD part is the only option that supports those features. For a compact mobile system requiring integrated graphics, the Intel chip is the functional choice, though its production status is a concern.

The average benchmark scores show both processors landing within 0.6% of each other overall, and both sit at the 45th percentile of all CPUs. This means that for mixed or unspecified workloads, the choice between them is effectively a wash. The deciding factors are the specific benchmark being run and the platform requirements, not the overall average performance. The AMD Ryzen 7 1700 wins three of four head-to-head tests and is the stronger multi-threaded performer; the Intel Core i5-8400H wins one test and offers a single-core edge in Geekbench plus integrated graphics for mobile use.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 7 1700 | Intel Core i5-8400H |

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

| Cores | 8 | 4 |

| Threads | 16 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 3.00 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.70 GHz | 4.10 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 45 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM4 | Intel BGA 1440 |

| Architecture | Zen | Coffee Lake |

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

| Generation | Ryzen 7 (Zen (Summit Ridge)) | Core i5 (Coffee Lake-H) |

| Process Node | 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) | 14 nm (Intel) |

| Die Size | 213 mm² | 126 mm² |

| Transistors | 4,800 million | Not specified |

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

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

| L3 Cache | 16 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR4 |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Not specified |

| Memory Bandwidth | 42.7 GB/s | Not specified |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Not specified |

| Integrated Graphics | None | UHD 630 |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | March 2017 | April 2018 |

| Launch MSRP | $329 | Not specified |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Part Number | YD1700BBAEBOX | SR3Z1 |