AMD Ryzen 7 1700X vs Intel Core i5-9400T Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits these two CPUs along clear lines: the AMD Ryzen 7 1700X dominates multi-threaded workloads, while the Intel Core i5-9400T takes a narrow single-core victory in one specific test. Out of the four head-to-head benchmarks recorded, the Ryzen 7 1700X wins three, and the i5-9400T wins one.

For heavily threaded tasks such as video rendering, 3D modeling, or software compilation, the Ryzen 7 1700X is the obvious choice. Its Cinebench R15 multicore score of 1537 is more than double the i5-9400T's 695, a 54.8% gap. The Geekbench multicore result tells a similar story: 5584 versus 3969, a 28.9% advantage. If your workload scales across many threads, the Ryzen part is not just faster, it is in a different performance class.

The Intel Core i5-9400T wins only Geekbench single-core, scoring 1152 against the Ryzen's 1100, a modest 4.7% lead. This is a slim margin, and it does not translate into a win in either Cinebench R15 or R20 single-core tests, because those benchmarks were not run on the Ryzen 7 1700X. The database only includes R15 and R20 single-core results for the Intel part, so the single-core comparison is limited to Geekbench. For everyday responsiveness, light browsing, or older games that favor single-thread performance, the i5-9400T holds a small edge, but the difference is small enough that most users would not notice it in real-world use.

The Ryzen 7 1700X also sits at a higher overall performance percentile, ranking in the 46th percentile of all CPUs, while the i5-9400T ranks in the 47th. That might sound contradictory given the Ryzen's 3-to-1 win ratio, but the average benchmark score tells a different story: the i5-9400T averages 2136 across its recorded benchmarks, while the Ryzen averages 2094. This is because the i5-9400T has more benchmark results in the database, including Cinebench R20 and R23 scores, which pull its average up. The Ryzen 7 1700X only has R15 and Geekbench results recorded, so its average is based on fewer data points.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The Intel Core i5-9400T uses Coffee Lake, a 14 nm design from Intel, built on the Core i5 (Coffee Lake Refresh) generation. The AMD Ryzen 7 1700X uses the original Zen architecture, also on a 14 nm process, but fabricated at GlobalFoundries rather than Intel's own foundry.

Core and thread counts diverge sharply. The i5-9400T has 6 cores and 6 threads, with no hyper-threading. The Ryzen 7 1700X has 8 cores and 16 threads, using simultaneous multithreading. That is 2 more cores and 10 more threads, which explains the massive multicore advantage. Clock speeds also favor the Ryzen: it runs at 3.40 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost, while the i5-9400T is clocked at just 1.80 GHz base and 3.40 GHz boost. The Intel part's very low base clock is a direct result of its 35 W TDP, versus the Ryzen's 95 W TDP.

Cache hierarchy differs as well. The i5-9400T has 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, with 9 MB of shared L3. The Ryzen 7 1700X has 96 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core, with a much larger 16 MB shared L3. The Ryzen's larger cache per core and bigger L3 pool helps feed its additional cores.

Memory support is similar on paper: both use DDR4 in a dual-channel configuration with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth. However, the Ryzen 7 1700X supports ECC memory, while the i5-9400T does not. Both use PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU.

The integrated graphics situation is one-sided. The i5-9400T includes Intel UHD 630 graphics, while the Ryzen 7 1700X has no integrated graphics at all. This means the Intel part can run a system without a discrete GPU, while the Ryzen requires one. The Ryzen compensates with an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking, while the i5-9400T is locked.

Production status also differs: the i5-9400T is end-of-life, while the Ryzen 7 1700X is still listed as active. The Ryzen also has a larger physical footprint, with a die size of 213 mm² and 4,800 million transistors, though the Intel part's die size and transistor count are not recorded in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest gap in the recorded data is in Cinebench R15 multicore. The Ryzen 7 1700X scores 1537, which is 54.8% ahead of the i5-9400T's 695. This is the single biggest differential in the head-to-head set, and it reflects the 8-core/16-thread configuration versus the 6-core/6-thread Intel part. For rendering workloads that use all available threads, this is a decisive win.

Cinebench R15 single-core also goes to the Ryzen, with a score of 154 versus the Intel's 97, a 37% advantage. This is notable because single-core performance is often expected to favor Intel, but here the Ryzen's higher boost clock of 3.80 GHz versus 3.40 GHz, combined with the older Intel architecture running at a very low base clock, gives AMD the edge.

Geekbench multicore follows the same pattern: Ryzen 7 1700X scores 5584, which is 28.9% ahead of the i5-9400T's 3969. The margin is smaller than in Cinebench, but still substantial. Geekbench single-core is the only Intel win, with the i5-9400T scoring 1152 versus the Ryzen's 1100, a 4.7% difference. This is a narrow margin, and it suggests that in lightly threaded scenarios the two CPUs are nearly equivalent, with a slight Intel edge.

The database also includes Cinebench R20 and R23 results for the i5-9400T, but no corresponding results for the Ryzen 7 1700X. The i5-9400T scores 2896 in R20 multicore, 408 in R20 single-core, 6896 in R23 multicore, and 973 in R23 single-core. Without Ryzen results for those tests, no direct comparison is possible, but the pattern from R15 and Geekbench strongly suggests the Ryzen would maintain its multicore lead in newer Cinebench versions.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is better for multi-core rendering workloads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 1700X wins decisively. It scores 1537 in Cinebench R15 multicore, which is 54.8% higher than the Intel Core i5-9400T's 695. In Geekbench multicore, the Ryzen leads 5584 to 3969, a 28.9% advantage.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-9400T have any performance advantage?

A: Yes, in Geekbench single-core the i5-9400T scores 1152 versus the Ryzen 7 1700X's 1100, a 4.7% lead. This is the only head-to-head test the Intel part wins. However, in Cinebench R15 single-core, the Ryzen actually wins with 154 versus 97, a 37% advantage.

Q: Can the AMD Ryzen 7 1700X run without a dedicated graphics card?

A: No, the Ryzen 7 1700X has no integrated graphics. The Intel Core i5-9400T includes UHD 630 graphics, so it can output video without a discrete GPU.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 1700X supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i5-9400T does not. Both use DDR4 in dual-channel mode with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do their overall benchmark averages compare?

A: The Intel Core i5-9400T has a higher average benchmark score of 2136, compared to the Ryzen 7 1700X's 2094. The i5-9400T also ranks in the 47th percentile of all CPUs, while the Ryzen ranks 46th. This is despite the Ryzen winning 3 of 4 head-to-head tests, because the Intel part has more benchmark results recorded.

Q: Is the Ryzen 7 1700X overclockable?

A: Yes, the Ryzen 7 1700X has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking. The Intel Core i5-9400T is locked and cannot be overclocked.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-9400T | AMD Ryzen 7 1700X |

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

| Cores | 6 | 8 |

| Threads | 6 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 1.80 GHz | 3.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.40 GHz | 3.80 GHz |

| TDP | 35 W | 95 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1151 | AMD Socket AM4 |

| Architecture | Coffee Lake | Zen |

| Foundry | Intel | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 4,800 million |

| Die Size | Not recorded | 213 mm² |

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

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

| L3 Cache | 9 MB (shared) | 16 MB (shared) |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD 630 | None |

| Unlocked Multiplier | No | Yes |

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

| Release Date | 2018-08-31 | 2017-03-01 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $399 |

| Part Number | SR3X8 | YD170XBCAEWOF |

The Verdict

Choose the AMD Ryzen 7 1700X if your work is multi-threaded. The data is unambiguous: it beats the i5-9400T by 54.8% in Cinebench R15 multicore and 28.9% in Geekbench multicore. With 8 cores and 16 threads versus 6 cores and 6 threads, the Ryzen is built for parallel workloads. It also has 16 MB of L3 cache, ECC memory support, an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, and a higher boost clock. The 95 W TDP is the cost you pay for that performance, and you will need a discrete GPU because there is no integrated graphics. The launch MSRP was $399, though that figure is historical.

Choose the Intel Core i5-9400T if you need a low-power processor with integrated graphics and can accept lower multi-threaded performance. Its 35 W TDP makes it far more efficient for basic desktop use, and the UHD 630 graphics mean it can run without a separate GPU. Its single-core Geekbench score is 4.7% higher than the Ryzen, but that is a small edge. The i5-9400T also has a higher average benchmark score (2136 versus 2094) and a slightly better percentile ranking (47th versus 46th), but those figures reflect a different set of recorded tests rather than true performance parity.

In practice, the decision comes down to workload and system requirements. If you are building a rendering or productivity machine with a dedicated GPU, the Ryzen 7 1700X is the stronger choice by a wide margin. If you need a quiet, low-power system without a discrete GPU, the i5-9400T is the only one of the two that can do that, and its multi-threaded deficit is severe. The Ryzen's 3-to-1 head-to-head win record, including a single-core Cinebench victory, makes it the better all-around processor for most users, provided they can supply a graphics card and accept higher power draw.