AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U vs Intel Core i5-14400F Comparison

The data presents a fascinating contrast between two very different processors that nevertheless land almost exactly on top of each other in aggregate performance. The Intel Core i5-14400F, a desktop part with a 65W TDP, and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U, a mobile part with a 28W TDP, are separated by a mere 0.1% in average benchmark score. This tiny delta suggests that the choice between them hinges entirely on workload and platform, not raw capability.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400F edges out the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U by a razor-thin margin. The i5-14400F scores 32279, while the Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U scores 32233, a difference of just 0.1%.

Q: How do the two processors compare in multi-threaded rendering workloads?

A: The Intel chip consistently wins in Cinebench multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the i5-14400F scores 21645 versus 20254 for the AMD part, giving Intel a 6.9% advantage. The same 6.9% delta appears in Cinebench R15 and R20 multicore tests.

Q: Are there any workloads where the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U wins?

A: Yes, the AMD chip wins two out of seventeen head-to-head benchmarks. It takes the Passmark integer math test with a score of 88339 against Intel's 81524, a 7.7% lead, and the Passmark random string sorting test with 33109 versus 32680, a 1.3% margin.

Q: What is the difference in physical size and manufacturing process?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U is built on a 4nm process by TSMC and has a die size of 178 mm². The Intel Core i5-14400F uses Intel's 10nm process and has a larger die at 215 mm². The AMD chip also integrates 25,000 million transistors, while the Intel chip's transistor count is not listed.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core i5-14400F and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U list ECC memory support as true. However, their memory compatibility differs; Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while AMD only supports DDR5.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U has a higher boost clock at 5.10 GHz, compared to the Intel Core i5-14400F's 4.70 GHz. The AMD chip also has a higher base clock at 3.30 GHz versus 2.50 GHz for the Intel part.

Architecture Differences

The two chips represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Core i5-14400F, part of the Raptor Lake Refresh generation, is a desktop processor on the Intel Socket 1700 platform. It uses a hybrid architecture of 10 cores and 16 threads, a configuration that allows it to handle heavily parallel workloads. In contrast, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U is a mobile processor from the Hawk Point generation, built on the Zen 4 architecture. It packs 8 cores and 16 threads into a much lower 28W TDP envelope, compared to Intel's 65W TDP.

Manufacturing differences are stark. AMD leverages TSMC's advanced 4nm process node, resulting in a 178 mm² die. Intel's 10nm process produces a larger 215 mm² die, and the Intel chip lacks a listed transistor count while AMD lists 25,000 million transistors. The cache hierarchies also differ: Intel offers 80 KB of L1 and 1.25 MB of L2 per core, with a larger 20 MB shared L3 cache. AMD provides 64 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core, with a smaller 16 MB shared L3 cache.

Platform features diverge as well. Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, giving builders flexibility, while AMD is DDR5-only but lists a specific memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, a figure not provided for the Intel part. PCIe support also differs: Intel offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while AMD provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). Perhaps most significantly for certain buyers, the AMD chip includes integrated Radeon 780M graphics, whereas the Intel i5-14400F has no integrated graphics (N/A). Both support ECC memory and are not multiplier-unlocked.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data tells a clear story of Intel dominance in most tests, punctuated by two notable AMD victories. The Intel Core i5-14400F wins 15 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons. The biggest single win for Intel is in Passmark physics, where it scores 1523 against AMD's 1174, a massive 29.7% advantage. This suggests the Intel architecture handles physics simulation calculations with significantly greater efficiency. Intel also shows a strong lead in floating-point math, scoring 61319 versus 50746, a 20.8% delta. Data compression is another area of clear Intel superiority, with a score of 315521 against 272664, representing a 15.7% lead.

In the Cinebench suite, the results are consistent. Across R15, R20, and R23, the Intel chip wins both single-core and multi-core tests by a uniform 6.9% margin. For example, Cinebench R23 multicore shows Intel at 21645 and AMD at 20254, while single-core shows 3055 versus 2859. This consistency suggests a core architectural efficiency advantage for Intel in these rendering workloads. The Passmark single-thread test shows a narrower Intel win of 1.6%, with scores of 3701 and 3641. Data encryption is also an Intel win, but by a slimmer 3.1% margin (16949 vs 16441), and extended instructions show a 4.2% Intel advantage.

The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U's two wins are interesting for what they reveal about the Zen 4 architecture. In Passmark integer math, AMD scores 88339 against Intel's 81524, a 7.7% lead. This is a substantial victory in a common general-purpose workload. The other win is in random string sorting, where AMD scores 33109 versus 32680, a smaller 1.3% margin. These wins indicate that AMD's architecture is particularly strong in integer-heavy logic and sorting algorithms, even while trailing in floating-point and physics simulations.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets show two processors aimed at entirely different segments. The Intel Core i5-14400F is a desktop part with a 65W TDP, while the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U is a mobile part with a 28W TDP. This is a critical distinction for any potential user, as it dictates the cooling and power delivery requirements. The Intel chip uses the Intel Socket 1700 platform, while AMD uses the AMD Socket FP7. The Intel part has 10 cores and 16 threads, whereas the AMD part has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Clock speeds differ significantly. Intel's base clock is 2.50 GHz with a boost of 4.70 GHz. AMD's base clock is higher at 3.30 GHz, and its boost climbs to 5.10 GHz. The manufacturing node is a major differentiator: Intel is on 10nm, while AMD is on TSMC's 4nm. Die size also differs, with Intel at 215 mm² and AMD at 178 mm², and AMD lists 25,000 million transistors while Intel does not list a transistor count.

Cache configurations are distinct. Intel provides 80 KB of L1 and 1.25 MB of L2 per core, with 20 MB of shared L3. AMD provides 64 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core, with 16 MB of shared L3. Memory support shows Intel offering DDR4 and DDR5, while AMD only supports DDR5, but AMD specifies a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s where Intel does not. PCIe capabilities differ, with Intel on Gen 5 with 16 lanes and AMD on Gen 4 with 20 lanes. Most notably, the AMD chip includes Radeon 780M integrated graphics, while the Intel chip has no integrated graphics. The release dates also differ, with Intel launching on 2024-01-07 and AMD on 2024-04-15.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion: the Intel Core i5-14400F is the superior performer in the vast majority of benchmark tests. It wins 15 of 17 comparisons, with particularly decisive victories in physics simulation and floating-point math. For any workload that relies on these areas, the Intel chip is the obvious choice. The consistent 6.9% lead across the entire Cinebench suite reinforces this, showing a broad advantage in rendering and general computation.

However, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U should not be dismissed. Its wins in integer math and random string sorting show that it has specific strengths. More importantly, the context of the 28W TDP cannot be ignored. The AMD chip achieves nearly identical aggregate performance to the Intel chip while consuming less than half the power budget. This makes it a compelling option for mobile platforms, where thermal and power constraints are paramount. The inclusion of integrated graphics also makes it a more complete package for systems without a discrete GPU.

The data suggests that a user building a desktop workstation or gaming PC should choose the Intel Core i5-14400F. It offers better performance in most compute-heavy tasks. Conversely, a user looking for a laptop or a compact, power-efficient system should choose the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U, which delivers comparable overall performance in a fraction of the power envelope.

Where Each One Wins

Intel Core i5-14400F: This processor dominates in multi-threaded rendering and physics workloads. It wins all Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 tests by 6.9%, making it the better choice for video rendering and 3D modeling tasks. Its 29.7% lead in Passmark physics and 20.8% lead in floating-point math also make it superior for scientific simulations and engineering applications. It also wins in data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, find prime numbers, multithread, and single-thread tests. For desktop users with access to a discrete GPU, the Intel chip is the clear winner across nearly every performance metric.

AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U: This processor wins in two specific areas: integer math and random string sorting. The 7.7% lead in integer math suggests an advantage in database operations, cryptography, and general integer-heavy code. The 1.3% win in string sorting points to efficiency in data processing and parsing tasks. However, the real story for this chip is not its benchmark wins, but its power efficiency. With a 28W TDP, it delivers 97.6% of the Intel chip's average score while drawing significantly less power. For mobile workstations, ultrabooks, or any application where battery life and heat management are critical, this chip's efficiency makes it the preferred choice despite losing most individual benchmarks.