AMD Ryzen 7 250 vs Intel Core i5-14500 Comparison

The Intel Core i5-14500 and AMD Ryzen 7 250 are both 86th-percentile performers, but they achieve that status through very different designs and market positions. The data shows a decisive victory for the Intel part in nearly every benchmark, yet the AMD chip’s low power envelope and mobile pedigree make it a compelling option for a specific set of use cases. This analysis breaks down exactly where the performance gaps lie and what they mean for a potential buyer.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are remarkably one-sided. Out of 15 head-to-head comparisons, the Intel Core i5-14500 wins all 15. There is no benchmark in the data where the AMD Ryzen 7 250 comes out ahead. This is not a close contest; it is a systematic performance advantage across every workload category.

The largest single gap appears in PassMark physics, where the Intel part scores 1746 against AMD’s 1147, a 52.2% advantage. This is a massive delta that suggests the Intel architecture handles the physics simulation workloads far more efficiently. Similarly, floating-point math shows a 49.3% lead for Intel (79576 vs 53285), indicating a major strength in scientific and mathematical calculations. The prime number finding test is even more lopsided in relative terms, with Intel scoring 106 versus AMD’s 73, a 45.2% difference.

The Intel advantage persists in more common productivity tasks, though the margins shrink. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, Intel scores 15012 versus 14676, a modest 2.3% lead. The single-core version of that test tells a different story: Intel’s 1917 beats AMD’s 1715 by 11.8%. This suggests the Intel core design has a clear edge in lightly-threaded workloads, even when the AMD chip has a higher boost clock.

PassMark data compression shows Intel winning by 23.5% (371294 vs 300708), and data encryption by 21.5% (21457 vs 17661). These are significant real-world gaps for anyone working with archives or encrypted files. The integer math test shows an 18.1% Intel lead (108124 vs 91565), while random string sorting is closer at 14.3% (40980 vs 35861).

The multi-threaded PassMark score favors Intel by 22.7% (30777 vs 25089), and even the single-thread PassMark test, which typically rewards high clock speeds, gives Intel a 7.4% edge (3952 vs 3678). The Cinebench R15 tests are closer—Intel leads by 5.8% in multi-core (2435 vs 2302) and just 1.5% in single-core (273 vs 269)—but the pattern is consistent.

The extended instructions test is the closest result, with Intel winning by only 4% (22473 vs 21613). This indicates that when AVX and similar instruction sets are heavily used, the gap narrows considerably.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the Intel Core i5-14500 is the clear winner for every performance metric measured. There is no workload category in the results where the AMD Ryzen 7 250 takes the lead. However, the magnitude of the Intel win varies, which helps define where each chip is more or less viable.

The Intel part dominates in physics simulation (52.2% lead), floating-point math (49.3% lead), and prime number finding (45.2% lead). These are compute-heavy, highly parallel workloads that benefit from the Intel’s higher core count and thread count. If your work involves finite element analysis, scientific computing, or any number-crunching application, the Intel chip is the obvious choice.

For single-threaded performance, the Intel chip wins by 11.8% in Cinebench R23 and 7.4% in PassMark. This matters for older games, many office applications, and any software that doesn’t scale well across cores. The Intel chip’s higher boost clock effectively translates into better real-world responsiveness in these scenarios.

The AMD Ryzen 7 250 does not win any benchmark, but its value lies elsewhere. With a TDP of 28 watts versus the Intel’s 65 watts, the data indicates the AMD chip produces less than half the heat. This makes it viable for thin-and-light laptops and passively-cooled systems where the Intel part would require a substantial cooling solution. The AMD chip’s 4nm process node from TSMC, versus Intel’s 10nm node, explains this efficiency advantage.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different foundations. The Intel Core i5-14500 uses Raptor Lake architecture on a 10nm process node fabricated by Intel itself. It packs 14 cores and 20 threads in a desktop-oriented design. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 uses Zen 4 architecture on a 4nm TSMC process node, featuring 8 cores and 16 threads in a mobile-focused package.

The transistor counts reflect this difference. The AMD chip contains 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, while the Intel part’s die size is 215 mm² (transistor count is not listed in the data). The smaller process node allows AMD to pack more transistors into a smaller area, which is the primary driver of its power efficiency.

Cache hierarchies differ significantly. Intel provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. AMD provides 64 KB L1, 1 MB L2, and 16 MB L3. The Intel chip’s larger caches at every level likely contribute to its performance lead in multi-threaded workloads, as more data can be kept closer to the cores.

Memory support is another differentiator. The Intel chip supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the AMD chip supports only DDR5. The AMD part also lists a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, which is not provided for the Intel chip. Both use dual-channel memory buses.

Integrated graphics differ: Intel offers UHD Graphics 770, while AMD includes the Radeon 780M. The AMD solution is generally more capable for gaming, though the benchmark data does not include GPU tests. The AMD chip also uses PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes, while Intel uses PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core i5-14500 wins every multi-threaded benchmark. It leads by 5.8% in Cinebench R15 multi-core (2435 vs 2302), 2.3% in Cinebench R23 multi-core (15012 vs 14676), and 22.7% in PassMark multi-thread (30777 vs 25089).

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 7 250 better for single-threaded tasks?

A: No. Despite having a higher boost clock (5.10 GHz vs 5.00 GHz), the AMD chip loses all single-threaded tests. The Intel part wins Cinebench R23 single-core by 11.8% (1917 vs 1715) and PassMark single-thread by 7.4% (3952 vs 3678).

Q: Which chip is more power-efficient?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 250 has a TDP of 28 watts, compared to 65 watts for the Intel Core i5-14500. This makes the AMD chip significantly more suitable for battery-powered or thermally constrained systems. The AMD chip is built on a 4nm TSMC process, while Intel uses 10nm.

Q: Do these chips support the same memory types?

A: No. The Intel chip supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the AMD chip supports only DDR5. Both use dual-channel memory buses. The AMD chip lists a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while no such figure is provided for the Intel chip.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i5-14500 has 14 cores and 20 threads. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 has 8 cores and 16 threads. This core count advantage is the likely reason for Intel’s large leads in multi-threaded tests like PassMark physics (52.2%) and floating-point math (49.3%).

Q: Are these processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. Neither the Intel Core i5-14500 nor the AMD Ryzen 7 250 has an unlocked multiplier. The Intel chip uses the Intel Socket 1700, while the AMD chip uses the AMD Socket FP8.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two processors, based only on the data provided:

• Cores: Intel 14 vs AMD 8
• Threads: Intel 20 vs AMD 16
• Base Clock: Intel 2.60 GHz vs AMD 3.30 GHz
• Boost Clock: Intel 5.00 GHz vs AMD 5.10 GHz
• TDP: Intel 65 W vs AMD 28 W
• Socket: Intel Socket 1700 vs AMD Socket FP8
• Architecture: Raptor Lake vs Zen 4
• Process Node: 10 nm (Intel) vs 4 nm (TSMC)
• Transistors: Not listed vs 25,000 million
• Die Size: 215 mm² vs 178 mm²
• L1 Cache: 80 KB per core vs 64 KB per core
• L2 Cache: 1.25 MB per core vs 1 MB per core
• L3 Cache: 24 MB shared vs 16 MB shared
• Memory Support: DDR4, DDR5 vs DDR5 only
• Memory Bandwidth: Not listed vs 89.6 GB/s
• ECC Memory: Yes vs No
• PCIe: Gen 5, 16 Lanes vs Gen 4, 20 Lanes
• Integrated Graphics: UHD Graphics 770 vs Radeon 780M
• Market Segment: Desktop vs Mobile
• Release Date: 2024-01-07 vs 2025-01-05
• Launch MSRP: $232 vs Not listed

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i5-14500 is the faster processor in every measured category. If your priority is raw performance, there is no reason to choose the AMD Ryzen 7 250 based on these numbers. The Intel chip’s 15-0 sweep includes decisive wins in physics (52.2%), floating-point math (49.3%), and data compression (23.5%). It also holds a solid 11.8% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core, which covers most everyday applications.

The AMD Ryzen 7 250 only makes sense if power consumption is your primary constraint. Its 28W TDP versus the Intel’s 65W TDP means it can be used in laptops and compact systems that the Intel chip simply cannot fit into. The AMD chip’s 4nm process and 25,000 million transistors on a smaller die show where that efficiency comes from. For a desktop builder, the Intel chip’s larger caches, higher core count, and support for both DDR4 and DDR5 make it the more versatile and capable choice.

The Intel part also holds a slight timing advantage, releasing on 2024-01-07 versus the AMD’s 2025-01-05, though both are listed as active production parts. The Intel chip has a launch MSRP of $232, while no MSRP is listed for the AMD part. Choose Intel for performance; choose AMD only if you need the low-power mobile form factor and can accept the performance deficit.