AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS vs Intel Core i5-14400F Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark record splits sharply along workload type. The Intel Core i5-14400F wins 15 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons, while the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS takes only 2. That dominance is not uniform, however. The Intel part wins every multi-core rendering test, every single-core test, and most math and compression workloads. The AMD part wins only in data encryption and integer math, two specific areas where its architecture holds an edge.

For desktop productivity, the data points clearly to Intel. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i5-14400F scores 21,645 against 11,515 for the Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS, a 88% advantage. That is the largest gap in the entire comparison. Single-core Cinebench R23 shows an even bigger relative margin at 101.8% (3,055 vs 1,514), though the absolute scores there are smaller. Geekbench multi-core also favors Intel heavily, at 28.7% (11,268 vs 8,756). For users running rendering, compilation, or any workload that scales across cores, the recorded data leaves little ambiguity.

The AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS does have its niches. In PassMark data encryption, it outscores the Intel chip by 5% (17,837 vs 16,949). In PassMark integer math, it leads by 7.5% (88,124 vs 81,524). These are not trivial margins, but they are isolated. The Intel part answers with a 53.6% win in PassMark find prime numbers (86 vs 56) and a 46% win in PassMark physics (1,523 vs 1,043). The overall average benchmark score also favors Intel: 32,279 for the i5-14400F versus 31,850 for the Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS. The Intel chip sits at the 83rd percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the AMD chip sits at the 82nd.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies. The Intel Core i5-14400F is a desktop part built on Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-R, using Intel's 10 nm process. It has 10 cores and 16 threads. The AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS is a mobile part built on Zen 3+ architecture, codenamed Rembrandt, using TSMC's 6 nm process. It has 8 cores and 16 threads. Thread counts match, but core counts do not.

Cache layouts differ notably. Intel provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3. AMD provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The Intel part therefore has more cache at every level, which helps explain its strong showing in latency-sensitive single-core tests.

Memory support also separates the two. The Intel chip supports both DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration. The AMD chip supports only DDR5, also dual-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The Intel part supports ECC memory; the AMD part does not. PCIe capabilities differ as well: Intel offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while AMD offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The AMD chip includes integrated graphics in the form of Radeon 680M; the Intel chip has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A.

Power and platform targets diverge. Intel runs at a 65 W TDP and uses Socket 1700. AMD runs at a 35 W TDP and uses Socket FP7. The Intel part is a desktop component with a launch MSRP of $196; the AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP. Both have locked multipliers. The Intel part was released in January 2024, while the AMD part came earlier, in April 2022. Both remain in active production.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most extreme result is Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Intel part scores 3,055 against 1,514 for AMD, a 101.8% lead. That is the only test in the entire set where the winner doubles the loser's score. Cinebench R23 multi-core is next at 88% (21,645 vs 11,515). Cinebench R15 single-core shows a 28.5% Intel lead (307 vs 239), while Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a 14% lead (2,181 vs 1,913).

Geekbench results are closer but still favor Intel. Multi-core comes in at 28.7% (11,268 vs 8,756), and single-core at 8.1% (2,058 vs 1,903). PassMark single-thread shows an 8.9% Intel edge (3,701 vs 3,400), and the duplicate PassMark singlethread entry confirms the same numbers.

In math and compression workloads, Intel wins most but not all. PassMark floating point math: 27.5% Intel (61,319 vs 48,096). PassMark find prime numbers: 53.6% Intel (86 vs 56). PassMark random string sorting: 11.3% Intel (32,680 vs 29,350). PassMark data compression: 11.6% Intel (315,521 vs 282,624). PassMark extended instructions: 5.5% Intel (19,937 vs 18,897). The two AMD wins are PassMark data encryption at 5% (17,837 vs 16,949) and PassMark integer math at 7.5% (88,124 vs 81,524). PassMark multithread also favors Intel at 11.8% (25,470 vs 22,775), and PassMark physics favors Intel at 46% (1,523 vs 1,043).

Looking at the nearest rivals provides context for both chips. The Intel i5-14400F sits within 0.5% of several comparable processors: it is 0.1% above the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U, 0.2% above the Intel Core i9-11900, 0.5% above the Intel Core i7-12800H, and 0.2% below the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS. The AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS likewise sits in a tight cluster: 0.8% above the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HS, 0.6% below the Intel Core i5-14450HX, 0.7% below the Intel Core i7-13705H, and 0.8% below the Intel Core i5-14400. Neither chip is an outlier among its peers; the head-to-head gap comes from the direct comparison, not from a strange sample.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split by use case. For desktop users who prioritize raw multi-core throughput, single-core responsiveness, and memory flexibility, the Intel Core i5-14400F is the stronger choice. It wins 15 of 17 head-to-head tests, including every Cinebench test, every Geekbench test, and the majority of PassMark workloads. Its 88% advantage in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 101.8% advantage in Cinebench R23 single-core are decisive. The 65 W TDP and Socket 1700 platform are standard desktop territory, and the support for both DDR4 and DDR5 gives builders flexibility. ECC memory support is an additional differentiator.

For users who need a low-power mobile processor with integrated graphics, the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS is the appropriate pick. Its 35 W TDP is far lower than the Intel part's 65 W. It includes Radeon 680M integrated graphics, so no discrete GPU is required. It also holds genuine wins in data encryption and integer math, which could matter for specific security or arithmetic-heavy tasks. The 76.8 GB/s memory bandwidth is recorded, and the PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes offers more total lanes than Intel's 16 Gen 5 lanes, though the Intel lanes are newer.

Nothing in the benchmark record suggests the AMD part competes with the Intel part in general desktop performance. The average benchmark score difference, 32,279 versus 31,850, is modest, but the head-to-head deltas are large and consistent. The Intel chip wins by double digits in most tests, and by triple digits in one. The AMD chip wins by single digits in its two best areas. The verdict from the data: choose Intel for performance, choose AMD for mobility, power efficiency, and integrated graphics.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400F wins every single-core test. Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 101.8% lead (3,055 vs 1,514), Geekbench single-core shows 8.1% (2,058 vs 1,903), and PassMark single-thread shows 8.9% (3,701 vs 3,400).

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, it wins 2 of the 17 head-to-head tests: PassMark data encryption by 5% (17,837 vs 16,949) and PassMark integer math by 7.5% (88,124 vs 81,524).

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest gap is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Intel part leads by 101.8% (3,055 vs 1,514). The second largest is Cinebench R23 multi-core at 88% (21,645 vs 11,515).

Q: Do both processors have the same thread count?

A: Yes, both have 16 threads. The Intel part has 10 cores, while the AMD part has 8 cores.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only the Intel Core i5-14400F supports ECC memory. The AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS does not.

Q: Which processor includes integrated graphics?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS includes Radeon 680M integrated graphics. The Intel Core i5-14400F has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-14400F | AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS |

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

| Cores | 10 | 8 |

| Base clock | 2.50 GHz | 3.30 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.70 GHz | 4.90 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 35 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | AMD Socket FP7 |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake | Zen 3+ |

| Process node | 10 nm | 6 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Die size | 215 mm² | 208 mm² |

| L1 cache | 80 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 20 MB (shared) | 16 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

| Memory bandwidth | Not recorded | 76.8 GB/s |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | N/A | Radeon 680M |

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Launch MSRP | $196 | Not recorded |