AMD Ryzen 7 250 vs Intel Core i5-14490F Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 7 250 and Intel Core i5-14490F are closely matched in overall standing, with the Intel part holding a decisive lead in raw compute benchmarks. The data shows a 13-to-2 win split in favor of the Core i5-14490F, though the Ryzen 7 250 claims specific victories in integer math and string sorting. Both processors sit at the 86th percentile among all CPUs, with average benchmark scores of 38,221 for the AMD and 38,149 for the Intel, a negligible 0.2% difference that belies the uneven head-to-head results.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core i5-14490F dominates the multi-core and single-core Cinebench tests, and these are its largest margins of victory. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel scores 23,000 against the AMD's 14,676, a 36.2% advantage. The single-core gap is even more pronounced: the Intel's 3,247 score beats the AMD's 1,715 by 47.2% in Cinebench R23 single-core. These are not close contests; the Intel part is categorically faster in both threaded and lightly-threaded render workloads.

The trend continues in the older Cinebench R15 suite, though with smaller margins. The Intel leads multi-core by 0.7% (2,318 vs 2,302) and single-core by 17.7% (327 vs 269). The single-core lead in R15 is substantial, but the multi-core result is essentially a tie, indicating the gap narrows in certain legacy workloads.

PassMark results paint a more nuanced picture. The Intel Core i5-14490F wins the PassMark multi-thread test with 28,662 points versus 25,089, a 12.5% lead. It also wins PassMark single-thread by 5% (3,873 vs 3,678). In floating-point math, the Intel is 19.9% ahead (66,558 vs 53,285), and in the physics test, its 2,093 score tops the AMD's 1,147 by a massive 45.2%. The data compression test shows an 11.6% Intel lead (340,026 vs 300,708), and it also wins data encryption by 3.1% (18,225 vs 17,661). Even in find-prime-numbers, the Intel's 122 score is 40.2% higher than the AMD's 73.

The AMD Ryzen 7 250 takes its two wins in PassMark integer math and random string sorting. It scores 91,565 in integer math versus the Intel's 87,844, a 4.2% advantage. In random string sorting, the AMD wins by a slim 0.7% (35,861 vs 35,608). The extended instructions test is nearly a dead heat, with the Intel winning by just 0.5% (21,731 vs 21,613). These results suggest the AMD has specific strengths in certain integer-heavy and sorting operations, but they are isolated victories.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core i5-14490F. It wins Cinebench R23 multi-core by 36.2% (23,000 vs 14,676) and PassMark multi-thread by 12.5% (28,662 vs 25,089).

Q: Is there any benchmark where the AMD Ryzen 7 250 wins?

A: Yes, it wins PassMark integer math by 4.2% (91,565 vs 87,844) and PassMark random string sorting by 0.7% (35,861 vs 35,608).

Q: How large is the single-core performance gap?

A: The Intel leads Cinebench R23 single-core by 47.2% (3,247 vs 1,715) and PassMark single-thread by 5% (3,873 vs 3,678).

Q: Do both processors have similar overall benchmark scores?

A: Yes. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 has an average benchmark score of 38,221, while the Intel Core i5-14490F scores 38,149, a difference of only 0.2%.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 250 has a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, while the Intel Core i5-14490F boosts up to 5.00 GHz.

Q: What is the core and thread count for each?

A: The Intel Core i5-14490F has 10 cores and 16 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 7 250 has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 uses the Zen 4 architecture with the Hawk Point codename, manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It has a die size of 178 mm² and contains 25,000 million transistors. The Intel Core i5-14490F uses the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-R codename, built on a 10 nm process at Intel. Its die size is larger at 215 mm², and transistor count is not listed.

Cache configurations differ significantly. The AMD part has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and a larger 24 MB of shared L3 cache. This larger cache hierarchy is part of why the Intel part excels in many compute tasks.

The memory support also diverges. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 supports DDR5 memory only, with a dual-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel Core i5-14490F supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus, though its memory bandwidth is not listed. PCIe support differs as well: the AMD has Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel has Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only).

Integrated graphics are another key differentiator. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 includes a Radeon 780M iGPU, while the Intel Core i5-14490F has no integrated graphics (N/A). This makes the AMD part a more complete package for systems without a discrete GPU. The AMD is a mobile-market segment part on the AMD Socket FP8, while the Intel is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1700. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i5-14490F is the superior processor for almost all measured performance metrics. It wins 13 of 15 head-to-head benchmarks, with decisive margins in Cinebench R23 multi-core (36.2%) and single-core (47.2%), as well as PassMark physics (45.2%) and find-prime-numbers (40.2%). For users prioritizing raw compute performance, rendering, or physics simulations, the Intel part is the clear choice.

The AMD Ryzen 7 250 is only recommended for those who specifically need its two winning workloads: integer math (4.2% ahead) and random string sorting (0.7% ahead). It also has the advantage of an integrated GPU and a lower TDP of 28 watts versus the Intel's 65 watts, though the data does not quantify the performance-per-watt impact. The AMD's mobile segment designation and FP8 socket target a different use case than the Intel's desktop 1700 socket.

Given the massive single-core deficit in Cinebench (47.2%) and the consistent multi-core losses, the AMD Ryzen 7 250 cannot be considered a performance alternative to the Intel Core i5-14490F. The Intel part is the verdict winner for any compute-heavy workload.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the AMD Ryzen 7 250 and Intel Core i5-14490F:

• Cores: 8 (AMD) vs 10 (Intel)
• Base Clock: 3.30 GHz (AMD) vs 2.50 GHz (Intel)
• Boost Clock: 5.10 GHz (AMD) vs 5.00 GHz (Intel)
• TDP: 28 W (AMD) vs 65 W (Intel)
• Socket: AMD Socket FP8 (AMD) vs Intel Socket 1700 (Intel)
• Architecture: Zen 4 (AMD) vs Raptor Lake (Intel)
• Codename: Hawk Point (AMD) vs Raptor Lake-R (Intel)
• Process Node: 4 nm (AMD) vs 10 nm (Intel)
• Foundry: TSMC (AMD) vs Intel (Intel)
• Die Size: 178 mm² (AMD) vs 215 mm² (Intel)
• Transistors: 25,000 million (AMD) vs not listed (Intel)
• L1 Cache: 64 KB per core (AMD) vs 80 KB per core (Intel)
• L2 Cache: 1 MB per core (AMD) vs 1.25 MB per core (Intel)
• L3 Cache: 16 MB shared (AMD) vs 24 MB shared (Intel)
• Memory Support: DDR5 (AMD) vs DDR4, DDR5 (Intel)
• Memory Bandwidth: 89.6 GB/s (AMD) vs not listed (Intel)
• PCIe: Gen 4, 20 Lanes (AMD) vs Gen 5, 16 Lanes (Intel)
• Integrated Graphics: Radeon 780M (AMD) vs N/A (Intel)
• Market Segment: Mobile (AMD) vs Desktop (Intel)
• Release Date: 2025-01-05 (AMD) vs 2023-12-31 (Intel)
• Part Number: 100-000001722 (AMD) vs SRN35 (Intel)

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-14490F is the winner for nearly every benchmark category. It takes multi-core rendering, as shown by the 36.2% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core. It wins single-core performance, with a 47.2% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core. It wins physics computations, floating-point math, data compression, data encryption, and prime number finding. For any task that relies on these operations—such as video rendering, 3D modeling, scientific computing, or general productivity—the Intel part is the better choice.

The AMD Ryzen 7 250 wins in exactly two areas: PassMark integer math (91,565 vs 87,844) and PassMark random string sorting (35,861 vs 35,608). These are narrow victories, with the integer math lead at 4.2% and the string sorting lead at just 0.7%. Workloads that are heavily dependent on integer arithmetic or string manipulation, such as certain database operations or specific algorithmic tasks, may favor the AMD. However, the margins are small, and the Intel part wins the more comprehensive multithread and single-thread tests.

The AMD also holds advantages in non-performance specifications: it includes an integrated Radeon 780M GPU, has a lower 28 W TDP, and supports faster Gen 4 PCIe with more lanes (20 vs 16). The Intel supports DDR4 memory in addition to DDR5 and uses Gen 5 PCIe. For a system requiring an iGPU or lower power draw, the AMD is the only option of the two. For raw speed, the Intel Core i5-14490F is the definitive winner.