AMD Ryzen AI 5 435G vs Intel Core i5-14490F Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data splits these two desktop processors into very different roles. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 435G has no benchmark entries in the database, meaning the entire quantitative comparison rests on the Intel Core i5-14490F’s measured results. For the Intel part, the database shows a clear strength profile across both synthetic rendering and real-world math workloads.

In Cinebench tests, the Intel Core i5-14490F delivers a multicore score of 23,000 in R23, a single-core score of 3,247 in R23, and corresponding R20 results of 9,660 multicore and 1,363 single-core. The R15 run shows 2,318 multicore and 327 single-core. These numbers place the Intel chip in the 86th percentile of all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 38,149.

For the PassMark suite, the Intel part shows particularly strong integer math results at 87,844 and floating-point math at 66,558. The multithread score sits at 28,662, while single-thread performance is recorded at 3,873. Data compression reaches 340,026, and encryption workloads score 18,225. The extended instructions test returns 21,731. Random string sorting finishes at 35,608, physics at 2,093, and prime number finding at 122.

Since the AMD Ryzen AI 5 435G has no recorded benchmark scores, the database cannot assign it any wins. The wins column for the AMD part is zero, and the same is true for its nearest rivals list, which is empty. The Intel Core i5-14490F therefore holds every measurable advantage in this comparison, but that advantage comes entirely from having data, not from a direct head-to-head test. The AMD processor’s 50th percentile ranking among all CPUs is a placeholder based on its position in the overall database, not on its own tested performance.

The practical takeaway is that the Intel chip wins every workload category that the database can quantify. The AMD part remains an unknown quantity until benchmark data is recorded. For rendering, the Intel part’s 23,000 R23 multicore score suggests strong multi-threaded capability. For single-threaded tasks, the 3,247 R23 score and 3,873 PassMark single-thread result indicate solid responsiveness. The 87,844 integer math score points to good general-purpose compute, while the 66,558 floating-point score covers scientific and analytical workloads.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward choice for users who require measurable performance today. The Intel Core i5-14490F has a complete benchmark profile, and that profile is strong. It sits in the 86th percentile of all CPUs in the database, with an average score of 38,149, and its nearest rivals are all within 0.3% of its score. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T trails by 0.1%, the AMD Ryzen 7 250 trails by 0.2%, and the Intel Core i5-13600HX trails by 0.3%. The Intel Core i5-13600KF is 0.1% ahead. This places the i5-14490F in a tight competitive cluster, but the cluster itself is high-performing.

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 435G cannot be recommended on the basis of measured results because no results exist in the database. Its 50th percentile ranking is a database-wide statistic, not a performance claim. Users who need verified numbers should select the Intel part. Users who require the AMD processor’s specific feature set, such as its integrated Radeon 840M graphics or its AMD Socket AM5 platform, must accept that its performance profile is unmeasured in this database.

The Intel part’s 10 cores and 16 threads give it a structural advantage in multi-threaded workloads, and its 24 MB of shared L3 cache supports that design. The AMD part offers 6 cores and 12 threads, which is a smaller count, but it uses a 4 nm process from TSMC versus Intel’s 10 nm process. The AMD part also has a newer release date of 2026-02-28, versus the Intel part’s 2023-12-31. Neither release date nor process node substitutes for benchmark data.

For a user who prioritizes verified performance, the Intel Core i5-14490F is the only defensible choice from this dataset. For a user who prioritizes the AMD platform’s integrated graphics or socket compatibility, the Ryzen AI 5 435G is a speculative option with no recorded performance evidence.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for these two processors. The headToHeadBenchmarks field is empty, and the wins counters show zero for both parts. This means the comparison cannot rely on direct same-workload tests. Instead, the analysis must use the Intel part’s individual benchmark scores as the sole quantitative reference.

The most significant Intel result is the Cinebench R23 multicore score of 23,000. This is a high-end figure for a 65 W TDP processor, and it aligns with the part’s 10 cores and 16 threads. The R23 single-core score of 3,247 is also notable, given the 5.00 GHz boost clock. The R20 multicore score of 9,660 and single-core score of 1,363 follow the same pattern.

In PassMark tests, the data compression score of 340,026 is the largest single number in the dataset. This indicates strong throughput for archive and storage-related workloads. The integer math score of 87,844 and floating-point math score of 66,558 show balanced general-purpose arithmetic performance. The multithread score of 28,662 is consistent with a 10-core, 16-thread design, while the single-thread score of 3,873 reflects the high boost clock.

The physics score of 2,093 and prime number score of 122 are lower-magnitude results but still part of the complete profile. Random string sorting at 35,608 and extended instructions at 21,731 round out the PassMark suite. Encryption at 18,225 is a moderate result, suggesting that the part is not specialized for cryptographic workloads but handles them adequately.

Because the AMD Ryzen AI 5 435G has no scores, there are no direct deltas to report. The Intel part’s nearest rivals, however, provide context. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T scores 38,194, which is 0.1% higher than the i5-14490F. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 scores 38,221, which is 0.2% higher. The Intel Core i5-13600HX scores 38,261, which is 0.3% higher. The Intel Core i5-13600KF scores 38,103, which is 0.1% lower. These margins are tiny, meaning the i5-14490F is statistically tied with its closest competitors.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher benchmark score in the database?

A: The Intel Core i5-14490F has an average benchmark score of 38,149 and sits in the 86th percentile. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 435G has no recorded benchmark scores and sits in the 50th percentile of all CPUs.

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

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 435G has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core i5-14490F has 10 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i5-14490F has a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 435G has a boost clock of 4.50 GHz.

Q: Does the AMD processor have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the AMD Ryzen AI 5 435G includes Radeon 840M integrated graphics. The Intel Core i5-14490F has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 435G supports DDR5 only, with dual-channel memory and ECC support. The Intel Core i5-14490F supports both DDR4 and DDR5, with dual-channel memory and no ECC support.

Q: How does the Intel Core i5-14490F compare to its nearest rivals?

A: Its average score of 38,149 is within 0.3% of four rivals. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T is 0.1% ahead, the AMD Ryzen 7 250 is 0.2% ahead, the Intel Core i5-13600HX is 0.3% ahead, and the Intel Core i5-13600KF is 0.1% behind.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different manufacturing and design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 435G uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, while the Intel Core i5-14490F uses a 10 nm process from Intel. The AMD part has a die size that is not recorded in the database, while the Intel part has a die size of 215 mm². The AMD part belongs to the Gorgon Point codename and the Ryzen AI 400 generation, which uses a mix of Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. The Intel part belongs to the Raptor Lake codename and the Raptor Lake Refresh architecture, specifically the Core i5 generation.

The cache hierarchies differ significantly. The AMD part has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of L3. The Intel part also has 80 KB of L1 per core but 1.25 MB of L2 per core and 24 MB of shared L3. The Intel part’s L3 cache is six times larger, which benefits workloads that repeatedly access a large working set. The AMD part’s smaller L3 suggests it relies more on the faster L1 and L2 caches, but with fewer cores, the total cache capacity is much lower.

Process node and cache size are not the only differences. The AMD part supports ECC memory, while the Intel part does not. The AMD part uses DDR5 exclusively, while the Intel part supports both DDR4 and DDR5. The AMD part has a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the Intel part’s memory bandwidth is not recorded in the database. The AMD part uses PCIe Gen 4 with 10 CPU lanes, while the Intel part uses PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. The Intel part’s PCIe Gen 5 support provides more bandwidth for expansion cards, but the AMD part’s Gen 4 is still current for most peripherals.

Socket compatibility is a major split. The AMD part uses AMD Socket AM5, which is a current AMD platform. The Intel part uses Intel Socket 1700, which is the LGA1700 platform. The AMD part has an unlocked multiplier, meaning it supports overclocking. The Intel part has a locked multiplier, meaning it does not. The AMD part’s TDP is 65 W, and the Intel part’s TDP is also 65 W. Both use dual-channel memory, but the AMD part’s memory bus is dual-channel while the Intel part’s is also dual-channel.

The AMD part’s integrated Radeon 840M graphics is a notable feature, as the Intel part has no integrated graphics at all. This means the AMD part can output video without a discrete GPU, while the Intel part requires one. The AMD part also has a newer release date of 2026-02-28, while the Intel part released on 2023-12-31. The Intel part’s part number is SRN35, and the AMD part’s part number is 100-000001158. Neither part has a recorded launch MSRP in the database.

The process node difference is substantial: 4 nm versus 10 nm. This gives the AMD part a potential efficiency advantage, though no power consumption measurements are recorded beyond the 65 W TDP for both. The Intel part’s larger L3 cache and higher core count are structural advantages for multi-threaded workloads. The AMD part’s smaller core count and smaller cache are offset by its more advanced process node and integrated graphics. The database does not record transistor counts or die size for the AMD part, so the full structural comparison remains incomplete.