AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U vs Intel Core i5-4690K Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data reveals a sharp split between these two processors. Across the Cinebench suite, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U consistently dominates, while the Intel Core i5-4690K takes decisive wins in Geekbench. Of the eight head-to-head comparisons recorded, the AMD part claims six victories and the Intel part claims two.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U scores 601 against 486 for the Core i5-4690K, a 23.7% advantage. The single-core test tells a similar story: 84 versus 68, a 23.5% lead for AMD. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multi-core margin holds at 23.7% (2507 versus 2027), and the single-core margin is 23.8% (354 versus 286). Cinebench R23 repeats the pattern: multi-core 5971 versus 4828, a 23.7% gap, and single-core 843 versus 681, a 23.8% gap. Every Cinebench result, regardless of version or thread count, lands within a narrow band of 23.5% to 23.8% in favor of the AMD chip.

The Geekbench results invert the ranking entirely. In Geekbench multi-core, the Intel Core i5-4690K scores 3789 against 2519 for the AMD part, a 33.5% advantage. The single-core test shows 1292 versus 843, a 34.8% lead for Intel. These are substantial margins, larger in percentage terms than any of the AMD Cinebench wins.

This divergence is unusual. The Cinebench suite and Geekbench measure different workloads, and here they point to opposite conclusions. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U excels in Cinebench's rendering tasks, while the Intel Core i5-4690K performs better in Geekbench's mixed workload. The average benchmark scores reflect this tension: the AMD part averages 1715 across all recorded tests, while the Intel part averages 1682. Both processors sit near the 40th percentile of all CPUs, with the AMD at 41 and the Intel at 40.

The nearest rivals for each part confirm their positioning. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U sits alongside Intel Core i7-4910MQ (avg score 1716, delta 0%), Intel Core i7-990X (1713, delta 0.1%), Intel Core i7-4860HQ (1720, delta -0.3%), and Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4 (1709, delta 0.3%). The Intel Core i5-4690K is bracketed by Intel Xeon D-1528 (1677, delta 0.3%), Intel Core i7-5850HQ (1688, delta -0.3%), Intel Core i7-3770K (1688, delta -0.3%), and AMD Ryzen 7 3750H (1690, delta -0.5%). The overall scores are close, but the workload-specific results diverge sharply.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two parts is substantial. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U uses the Zen architecture, codenamed Raven Ridge, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It belongs to the 2000 series and the Ryzen 7 generation. The Intel Core i5-4690K uses the Haswell architecture, built on a 22 nm process at Intel, belonging to the Core i5 Haswell generation.

Core counts are identical at four, but threading differs. The AMD part supports 8 threads through simultaneous multithreading, while the Intel part offers only 4 threads. This explains part of the AMD advantage in multi-threaded Cinebench workloads. Base and boost clocks tell a different story: the AMD runs at 2.20 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost, while the Intel runs at 3.50 GHz base and 3.90 GHz boost. The Intel part has higher clocks, yet loses in Cinebench, indicating that the AMD architecture extracts more work per clock in those tests.

Cache hierarchies differ as well. The AMD part has 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 4 MB shared L3. The Intel part has 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 6 MB shared L3. The AMD part has larger L1 and L2 caches per core, while the Intel part has a larger shared L3. The transistor counts reflect the design gap: 4,950 million for AMD versus 1,400 million for Intel, with die sizes of 210 mm² and 177 mm² respectively.

Memory support diverges by generation. The AMD part supports DDR4 with dual-channel memory and a bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The Intel part supports DDR3 with dual-channel memory and a bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s. The AMD platform has a 50% bandwidth advantage on paper. PCIe lane counts also differ: the AMD provides 8 CPU lanes in Gen 3, while the Intel provides 16 CPU lanes in Gen 3. Integrated graphics differ as well: the AMD has Radeon RX Vega 10, while the Intel has HD 4600. Neither supports ECC memory.

The market segments and production statuses are opposite. The AMD part is a mobile processor, currently active in production, released in January 2019, with a locked multiplier. The Intel part is a desktop processor, end-of-life, released in June 2014, with an unlocked multiplier. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $243. The AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP. Power envelopes differ dramatically: 15 W for the AMD versus 88 W for the Intel. The sockets are incompatible: AMD Socket FP5 for the AMD part, Intel Socket 1150 for the Intel part.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear but workload-dependent verdict. For Cinebench-style rendering workloads, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U is the stronger processor by a consistent margin of roughly 23.7% across all versions. Its 8 threads and larger per-core caches deliver higher scores in every recorded Cinebench test. For Geekbench workloads, the Intel Core i5-4690K is the stronger processor by roughly 33.5% to 34.8%, despite having fewer threads and older architecture.

The average benchmark scores are nearly identical: 1715 for AMD versus 1682 for Intel, a gap of about 2%. The percentile rankings are similarly close: 41st versus 40th percentile. This means the overall performance class is the same, but the workload profile is not. The AMD part wins in CPU-bound rendering tasks; the Intel part wins in Geekbench's specific mix of integer and floating-point operations.

The mobile versus desktop distinction matters for real-world deployment. The AMD part consumes 15 W, making it suitable for thin-and-light laptops. The Intel part consumes 88 W and belongs to a desktop platform. The Intel part offers an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, while the AMD part does not. The Intel part has more PCIe lanes (16 versus 8) and a larger shared L3 cache (6 MB versus 4 MB), but the AMD part has higher memory bandwidth (38.4 GB/s versus 25.6 GB/s) and a more advanced process node (14 nm versus 22 nm).

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U scores 5971 versus 4828 for the Intel Core i5-4690K, a 23.7% advantage.

Q: Which processor wins in Geekbench single-core?

A: The Intel Core i5-4690K scores 1292 versus 843 for the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U, a 34.8% advantage.

Q: Do both processors have the same number of cores?

A: Yes, both have 4 cores. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U supports 8 threads, while the Intel Core i5-4690K supports 4 threads.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U supports DDR4 with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core i5-4690K supports DDR3 with 25.6 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i5-4690K has a 3.90 GHz boost clock, slightly higher than the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U's 3.80 GHz boost clock.

Q: What are the TDP ratings?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U has a TDP of 15 W. The Intel Core i5-4690K has a TDP of 88 W.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U wins in: Cinebench R15 multi-core (601 versus 486, 23.7% ahead), Cinebench R15 single-core (84 versus 68, 23.5% ahead), Cinebench R20 multi-core (2507 versus 2027, 23.7% ahead), Cinebench R20 single-core (354 versus 286, 23.8% ahead), Cinebench R23 multi-core (5971 versus 4828, 23.7% ahead), and Cinebench R23 single-core (843 versus 681, 23.8% ahead). These results indicate an advantage in rendering workloads across all Cinebench versions. The part also offers higher memory bandwidth, a smaller process node, and a dramatically lower TDP.

Intel Core i5-4690K wins in: Geekbench multi-core (3789 versus 2519, 33.5% ahead) and Geekbench single-core (1292 versus 843, 34.8% ahead). These results indicate an advantage in Geekbench's workload mix. The part also offers more PCIe lanes (16 versus 8), a larger shared L3 cache (6 MB versus 4 MB), an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, and a higher base clock (3.50 GHz versus 2.20 GHz). Its desktop platform and end-of-life status should be weighed against these benchmark results.