AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 vs Intel Core i5-11600T Comparison

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark comparison between the Intel Core i5-11600T and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 presents a surprisingly consistent picture. Across all six recorded Cinebench tests, the AMD processor takes the win, although the margins are remarkably narrow. The database shows a perfect 6-0 sweep for the Ryzen 7 PRO 1700, with every single test finishing within a single percentage point.

Starting with Cinebench R15, the multicore result shows the AMD chip scoring 1259 against Intel’s 1248, a difference of 0.9 percent. The single-core R15 test tells a similar story: 177 for AMD versus 176 for Intel, a 0.6 percent edge. These are margins so slim that they fall well within normal run-to-run variation on most test systems, yet the pattern holds consistently across every workload.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the multicore scores are 5246 for the Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 and 5201 for the Core i5-11600T, again a 0.9 percent gap. The single-core R20 test shows 740 versus 734, a 0.8 percent difference. The trend continues into Cinebench R23, where the multicore result is 12491 for AMD and 12385 for Intel (0.8 percent apart), and the single-core result is 1763 versus 1748 (0.9 percent apart).

What stands out here is not the magnitude of any single victory but the uniformity of the outcome. The Ryzen 7 PRO 1700, despite being a much older design, edges out the newer Intel part in every single benchmark. The largest margin anywhere is 0.9 percent, which is essentially a statistical tie in practical terms. Yet the consistency across six separate tests suggests this is not random noise; the AMD processor holds a real, albeit tiny, performance advantage in these workloads.

The broader database context reinforces this picture. The Intel Core i5-11600T sits at the 56th percentile among all CPUs tracked, while the Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 sits at the 55th percentile. Their average benchmark scores are 3742 and 3613 respectively, meaning the Intel part actually holds a higher overall average across all recorded tests, even though it loses every head-to-head Cinebench matchup. This discrepancy likely reflects the fact that the Intel chip has additional Geekbench scores in the database that are not mirrored for the AMD part.

# Where Each One Wins

The data suggests a clear division of strengths when considering the broader benchmark picture. The Intel Core i5-11600T shows its best performance in Geekbench tests, which are not present in the head-to-head comparison. Its Geekbench multicore score is 6653 and single-core is 1791, numbers that would place it well ahead of the AMD chip if those tests were directly compared. However, the database does not record Geekbench results for the Ryzen 7 PRO 1700, so a direct comparison in those workloads is not possible.

For the Cinebench family of tests, which stress CPU rendering performance, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 wins every round. This is notable because Cinebench is widely used as a proxy for content creation workloads such as 3D rendering and video encoding. The AMD chip’s victory in all three Cinebench versions (R15, R20, R23) suggests it maintains a slight edge in threaded rendering tasks, even though its core count advantage (8 cores versus 6) might lead one to expect a larger margin.

The Intel part, by contrast, appears better suited to the type of workloads captured by Geekbench, which includes a broader mix of integer, floating point, and memory tasks. Its single-core Geekbench score of 1791 is particularly strong, reflecting the higher boost clock of 4.10 GHz compared to the AMD’s 3.70 GHz. For users prioritizing single-threaded responsiveness in everyday applications, the Intel chip’s recorded Geekbench numbers are the more compelling data points.

In practical terms, the use-case split is narrow. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 is the pick for pure Cinebench rendering workloads, while the Intel Core i5-11600T offers the only recorded Geekbench results, which are strong in both single and multicore scenarios. Neither chip dominates the other by a wide margin in any direction.

# Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is substantial, reflecting their different design philosophies and release eras. The Intel Core i5-11600T uses Rocket Lake architecture, built on Intel’s 14 nm process with a die size of 276 mm². It features 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 1700.00 MHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache.

The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 uses the original Zen architecture, also built on a 14 nm process but manufactured by GlobalFoundries rather than Intel. Its die size is smaller at 213 mm², yet it packs 4,800 million transistors compared to Intel’s unspecified count. The AMD chip offers 8 cores and 16 threads, with a lower base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 3.70 GHz. Its cache includes 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a larger 16 MB of shared L3 cache.

These differences explain much of the benchmark behavior. The AMD chip’s two additional cores and four additional threads give it a theoretical parallel processing advantage, which likely accounts for its narrow wins in multicore Cinebench tests. However, its lower clock speeds mean each individual core is less potent, which explains why the single-core margins are equally tight despite Intel’s higher boost clock.

Memory support also differs. Both support DDR4 in dual-channel configuration, but Intel lists a memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s while AMD lists 42.7 GB/s. The Intel chip also supports PCIe Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes, while the AMD chip is limited to PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes. This gives the Intel platform a significant advantage in I/O bandwidth, which could matter for storage and GPU performance in real systems.

The integrated graphics situation is another clear divergence. The Intel Core i5-11600T includes UHD Graphics 750, while the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 has no integrated graphics at all. This makes the Intel chip viable for systems without a discrete GPU, whereas the AMD chip requires a separate graphics card.

ECC memory support is exclusive to the AMD part, which may appeal to workstation users who require error-correcting memory. The AMD chip also has an unlocked multiplier, enabling overclocking, while the Intel part is locked. The Intel chip uses Socket 1200, while the AMD uses Socket AM4, making platform compatibility a key consideration.

# FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 wins all six recorded Cinebench comparisons, covering R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multicore tests. The Intel Core i5-11600T has zero wins in the head-to-head dataset.

Q: How large is the AMD’s largest benchmark advantage?

A: The largest margin in any head-to-head test is 0.9 percent. This occurs in Cinebench R15 multicore, R20 multicore, and R23 single-core, where the AMD chip leads by that exact amount.

Q: Does the Intel chip have any benchmark where it is not compared?

A: Yes, the Intel Core i5-11600T has Geekbench scores recorded in the database (6653 multicore, 1791 single-core). The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 has no Geekbench results, so no direct comparison is possible in those tests.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Intel Core i5-11600T has 6 cores and 12 threads. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i5-11600T boosts to 4.10 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 boosts to 3.70 GHz. However, the AMD chip has a higher base clock at 3.00 GHz versus 1700.00 MHz for Intel.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i5-11600T does not.

# The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a nuanced picture that defies simple categorization. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 wins every Cinebench test in the head-to-head comparison, but the margins are so small that they are unlikely to be perceptible in real-world use. A 0.9 percent difference in rendering performance translates to less than one second per minute of render time, which most users would never notice.

The Intel Core i5-11600T, despite losing all six head-to-head tests, holds a higher average benchmark score (3742 versus 3613) and a higher percentile ranking (56th versus 55th among all CPUs). This is driven entirely by its Geekbench results, which are strong and not mirrored in the AMD’s data set. For users who trust Geekbench as a measure of general system performance, the Intel chip appears to be the better all-rounder.

For content creators using Cinebench as their primary benchmark, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 is the safer choice, if only by a hair. Its additional cores and larger L3 cache provide a structural advantage in threaded workloads that consistently shows up in the recorded data. The AMD chip also offers ECC memory support and an unlocked multiplier, which are meaningful features for workstation builds.

The Intel chip counters with integrated graphics, higher memory bandwidth, PCIe Gen 4 support, and a much more recent release date (2021 versus 2017). These features make it a more modern platform choice, particularly for systems that need a fallback display output or want the latest I/O standards.

In truth, the data shows two processors that are nearly identical in raw CPU performance, despite their considerable architectural differences. The choice should hinge on platform features rather than benchmark scores. Users who need integrated graphics, PCIe Gen 4, or the newer Socket 1200 platform should choose the Intel Core i5-11600T. Users who need ECC memory, overclocking capability, or the mature AM4 ecosystem should choose the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700.

The production status also differs: the Intel part is end-of-life, while the AMD part is still active. This suggests the AMD chip may have a longer availability window for new purchases.

# Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-11600T | AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 |

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

| Cores | 6 | 8 |

| Threads | 12 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 1700.00 MHz | 3.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.10 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| TDP | 35 W | 65 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1200 | AMD Socket AM4 |

| Architecture | Rocket Lake | Zen |

| Foundry | Intel | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 4,800 million |

| Die Size | 276 mm² | 213 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 96 KB (per core) |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | 42.7 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes | Gen 3, 16 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 750 | None |

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

| Release Date | 2021-03-15 | 2017-06-28 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Part Number | SRKNX | YD170BBBM88AE |