AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS vs Intel Core i9-10900F Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct comparison between the AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS and the Intel Core i9-10900F is remarkably tight, with the Intel part taking every single head-to-head benchmark by the same narrow margin. Across all six Cinebench tests, the Intel Core i9-10900F leads by exactly 0.4% in each case. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Intel scores 1688 against the AMD’s 1682, a difference of just six points. Single-core R15 shows the same pattern: 238 versus 237.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the Intel posts 7036 multi-core and 993 single-core, while the AMD records 7009 and 989 respectively. The gap remains at 0.4%. The most demanding workload, Cinebench R23, sees the Intel at 16753 multi-core and 2365 single-core, against the AMD’s 16690 and 2356. Again, the delta is 0.4% in Intel’s favor.

This consistency is striking. The recorded data shows a processor that wins every round, but by a margin so small it borders on measurement noise. In practical terms, a user would struggle to notice a 0.4% difference in rendering times or single-threaded responsiveness. The Intel’s victory is technically absolute, but the magnitude suggests these two chips are effectively peers in Cinebench workloads.

The database also includes average benchmark scores that incorporate a broader set of tests for each processor. The AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS has an average score of 4827, while the Intel Core i9-10900F averages 4664. That puts the AMD about 3.5% ahead on the wider aggregate metric, even though it loses every direct Cinebench comparison. This discrepancy implies that the AMD’s other benchmark results, which are not part of the head-to-head set, compensate for its slight Cinebench deficit. The Intel’s additional tests include 3DMark multi-threaded runs and Geekbench scores, which may pull its average in a different direction.

Percentile rankings reinforce the closeness. The AMD sits at the 59th percentile among all CPUs, the Intel at the 58th. These are adjacent positions in the distribution, meaning the database places them nearly at the same performance tier. The nearest rivals for each chip also cluster tightly. The AMD’s closest competitors are the Ryzen 7 4700GE (delta -0.2%), Ryzen 9 3950X (delta 0.4%), Xeon E-2386G (delta 0.6%), and Core i5-1350P (delta 1.1%). The Intel’s nearest rivals include the Core i9-9900KF (delta 0.3%), Core i9-11900T (delta -0.4%), Core i9-10900E (delta -0.9%), and Core i9-10900 (delta 1.1%). Both chips are surrounded by similar performers, confirming that neither has a decisive edge in the broader market context.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core i9-10900F wins all six direct Cinebench comparisons against the AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS. The margin is 0.4% in every test, covering R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core modes.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS has a higher average benchmark score of 4827, versus 4664 for the Intel Core i9-10900F. This puts the AMD ahead by roughly 3.5% on the aggregate metric, despite losing the direct head-to-head tests.

Q: What are the percentile rankings for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS ranks at the 59th percentile among all CPUs, while the Intel Core i9-10900F ranks at the 58th percentile. The two are effectively in the same performance tier.

Q: Do the processors have the same base clock speed?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS and the Intel Core i9-10900F have a base clock of 2.80 GHz. The boost clocks differ, with the Intel reaching 5.20 GHz versus the AMD’s 4.40 GHz.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i9-10900F has 10 cores and 20 threads. The AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS has 8 cores and 16 threads. Intel holds the advantage in core count, yet the benchmark results show minimal impact.

Q: What is the production status of each chip?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS is listed as Active, meaning it is still in production. The Intel Core i9-10900F is marked End-of-life, indicating it has been discontinued.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-10900F wins every direct Cinebench benchmark in the database. That includes multi-core rendering tasks, where its additional two cores and four threads might be expected to provide a larger advantage, yet it only manages a 0.4% lead. The same applies to single-core tests, where its higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz against the AMD’s 4.40 GHz similarly translates to a negligible edge. For users who rely specifically on Cinebench scores as a proxy for rendering performance, the Intel part is the nominal winner, but the margin is so thin that real-world software would likely show no consistent difference.

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS wins on the aggregate average benchmark score. The database’s broader metric, which includes tests beyond the direct head-to-head set, places the AMD at 4827 versus the Intel’s 4664. This suggests that in a more varied workload mix, the AMD may hold a slight overall advantage. The AMD also benefits from being an Active production part, which implies continued availability and support, while the Intel is End-of-life. For mobile or low-power scenarios, the AMD’s 35 W TDP compared to the Intel’s 65 W TDP points to a substantial efficiency benefit, though the database does not include direct power consumption measurements.

The use-case split is therefore clear. For pure Cinebench-specific rendering comparisons, the Intel Core i9-10900F is the winner, albeit by a hair. For a general-purpose benchmark average across multiple test suites, the AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS comes out ahead. The Intel’s higher core count and boost clock do not translate into a meaningful victory in the recorded data. The AMD’s more modern architecture and lower power envelope, combined with its higher average score, make it the stronger choice for a broader set of workloads, especially where thermal or power constraints matter.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification category. The AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core i9-10900F has 10 cores and 20 threads. Both share a base clock of 2.80 GHz, but the boost clock diverges: the Intel reaches 5.20 GHz, the AMD tops out at 4.40 GHz. Thermal design power is another clear split, with the AMD rated at 35 W and the Intel at 65 W.

Sockets are incompatible. The AMD uses AMD Socket FP6, while the Intel uses Intel Socket 1200. Process technology also differs significantly: the AMD is built on a 7 nm node by TSMC, whereas the Intel uses Intel’s 14 nm process. The AMD’s die size is 180 mm² and it contains 10,700 million transistors; the database lists no die size or transistor count for the Intel.

Cache layouts show a notable difference in L2. The AMD has 512 KB of L2 per core, while the Intel has 256 KB per core. Both have 64 KB of L1 per core. L3 cache favors the Intel, which has 20 MB shared, versus the AMD’s 16 MB shared. Memory bandwidth also differs, with the AMD rated at 68.3 GB/s and the Intel at 46.9 GB/s, though both support DDR4 on a dual-channel bus. Neither supports ECC memory.

The AMD includes integrated graphics in the form of Radeon Vega 8, while the Intel Core i9-10900F has no integrated graphics listed. PCIe support is Gen 3 for both, but the Intel is specified as having 16 lanes from the CPU only, whereas the AMD’s listing simply says Gen 3. The AMD is a mobile processor, the Intel is a desktop processor. Release dates differ as well: the AMD launched on January 11, 2021, and the Intel on April 29, 2020. The Intel has a launch MSRP of $464. The AMD has no recorded launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental architecture gap is between AMD’s Zen 3 and Intel’s Comet Lake. The AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS uses the Zen 3 architecture with the codename Cezanne, part of the 5000 series. The Intel Core i9-10900F uses the Comet Lake architecture, also its codename, and belongs to the Core 10th Gen family. These are generations apart in design philosophy. Zen 3 is built on a 7 nm TSMC process, while Comet Lake uses Intel’s 14 nm process. That process advantage shows in the AMD’s smaller die size of 180 mm² and its transistor count of 10,700 million; the Intel’s die size and transistor count are not recorded.

Core design differs in L2 cache size, with the AMD providing 512 KB per core versus the Intel’s 256 KB per core. L3 is larger on the Intel, 20 MB shared versus 16 MB shared on the AMD. The AMD’s memory bandwidth is higher at 68.3 GB/s compared to the Intel’s 46.9 GB/s, which may reflect the newer memory controller design in Zen 3. The AMD integrates Radeon Vega 8 graphics, a feature entirely absent from the Intel part, which relies on a discrete GPU. The Intel’s boost clock is substantially higher at 5.20 GHz, but the AMD compensates with a lower TDP of 35 W versus 65 W, indicating a much more efficient power profile.

Both processors use DDR4 memory and PCIe Gen 3, so those interfaces are shared. The AMD’s socket is FP6, designed for mobile systems, while the Intel uses Socket 1200 for desktop boards. The AMD is an Active product, the Intel is End-of-life. These architectural differences explain why the two chips land at nearly the same performance level despite very different designs. The AMD’s newer node and higher efficiency offset the Intel’s extra cores and higher clocks.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents an unusual outcome. The Intel Core i9-10900F wins every direct head-to-head Cinebench test, but only by 0.4% each time. The AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS wins the average benchmark score by a wider margin, 4827 to 4664, and sits one percentile higher at 59 versus 58. For a user choosing between these two, the decision hinges on which metric matters more.

If the workload is specifically Cinebench rendering, the Intel part is the technical winner. Its 10 cores and 20 threads, plus a 5.20 GHz boost clock, give it a nominal edge in every recorded test. However, the margin is so small that it would be indistinguishable in practice. The Intel also comes with a launch MSRP of $464, but its End-of-life status means it is no longer in active production.

If the workload is more varied, the AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS is the better pick based on its higher average benchmark score. It also offers a dramatically lower TDP of 35 W versus 65 W, which is a critical advantage for mobile systems, given its market segment. The AMD’s integrated Radeon Vega 8 graphics provide a fallback display output that the Intel lacks entirely. Its Active production status ensures ongoing availability.

The database suggests that these processors are performance equivalents in Cinebench, with the Intel holding a negligible lead. The AMD pulls ahead on the broader average metric and offers superior efficiency and features like integrated graphics. The Intel’s only clear wins are core count, boost clock, and L3 cache size, but those do not translate into meaningful benchmark superiority. The verdict from the data is that the AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS is the more balanced and future-proof choice, while the Intel Core i9-10900F remains a viable desktop part for users who prioritize raw clock speed and core count in a single-threaded or rendering-focused environment.