AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 vs Intel Core i5-14400F Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 has an average benchmark score of 37762, while the Intel Core i5-14400F has an average score of 32279. The AMD part sits at the 86th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel part sits at the 83rd percentile.

Q: How does the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The database shows the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 is essentially level with its closest competitors. It trails the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 by 0.1%, trails the Intel Core 5 211E by 0.2%, leads the Intel Core i5-13600K by 0.2%, and trails the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 by 0.4%.

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

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core i5-14400F has 10 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400F has a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, which is higher than the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435's boost clock of 4.50 GHz.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: Both processors support ECC memory. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the Intel Core i5-14400F supports DDR4 and DDR5.

Q: Which processor includes integrated graphics?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 includes Radeon 840M integrated graphics. The Intel Core i5-14400F has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A.

The Verdict

The data separates these two processors by workload profile and platform context. The Intel Core i5-14400F wins 9 of the 11 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, including every multithreaded workload in the PassMark suite. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 wins only the single-thread comparison, and by a narrow 1.5% margin.

For users who need maximum throughput across parallel workloads, the Intel Core i5-14400F is the clear choice from the recorded measurements. Its leads range from 16.1% in extended instructions to 34.7% in physics. The Intel processor also carries a higher boost clock at 4.70 GHz versus 4.50 GHz, and it uses a larger shared L3 cache of 20 MB compared to the AMD part's 4 MB L3.

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 has its own advantages. It posts a higher average benchmark score (37762 versus 32279) despite losing most individual tests, which indicates its scoring profile is more consistent across the full benchmark set. It also has a much lower TDP at 28 watts versus 65 watts, making it the more power-efficient option. The AMD part includes integrated Radeon 840M graphics, while the Intel part has none.

The choice depends on whether the workload is dominated by multithreaded throughput or by power-constrained, integrated-graphics mobile use. The Intel Core i5-14400F is the desktop performance leader in these measurements. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 is the mobile, low-power part with a better overall average score and a substantial efficiency advantage.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core i5-14400F dominates the head-to-head benchmark table. In passmark_data_compression, Intel scores 315521 against AMD's 232803, a 26.2% lead. In passmark_data_encryption, Intel scores 16949 against 11267, a 33.5% lead. The Intel part also leads in passmark_extended_instructions with 19937 versus 16724, a 16.1% difference.

The math workloads show consistent Intel advantages. In passmark_find_prime_numbers, Intel scores 86 against AMD's 57, a 33.7% lead. In passmark_floating_point_math, Intel scores 61319 against 41114, a 33% lead. In passmark_integer_math, Intel scores 81524 against 60879, a 25.3% lead.

The multithreaded and physics tests follow the same pattern. In passmark_multithread, Intel scores 25470 against 19091, a 25% lead. In passmark_physics, Intel scores 1523 against 995, a 34.7% lead, the largest margin in the entire comparison. In passmark_random_string_sorting, Intel scores 32680 against 24936, a 23.7% lead.

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 wins the single-thread tests. In passmark_single_thread, AMD scores 3757 against Intel's 3701, a 1.5% lead. The identical result appears in the passmark_singlethread entry, also 3757 versus 3701, a 1.5% lead. These are the only two wins for the AMD part in the head-to-head set.

The average benchmark scores tell a different story than the head-to-head table. AMD's average score of 37762 is higher than Intel's 32279, despite Intel winning 9 of 11 tests. This reflects the AMD part's position among its nearest rivals: it sits within 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132, the Intel Core 5 211E, and the Intel Core i5-13600K. The Intel Core i5-14400F, by contrast, sits within 0.5% of the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U, the Intel Core i9-11900, the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS, and the Intel Core i7-12800H. The two processors occupy different performance tiers in the database's overall scoring.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification field. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core i5-14400F has 10 cores and 16 threads. The Intel part has a higher base clock of 2.50 GHz versus 2.00 GHz, and a higher boost clock of 4.70 GHz versus 4.50 GHz.

Power consumption differs substantially. The AMD part has a TDP of 28 watts, while the Intel part has a TDP of 65 watts. This is a 37-watt gap and the largest single difference in the specification sheet.

The sockets are incompatible. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP8, while the Intel part uses Intel Socket 1700. The AMD part is a mobile market segment product, while the Intel part is a desktop market segment product.

Memory support differs. The AMD part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5, and the database records no memory bandwidth figure for it. Both use dual-channel memory buses and both support ECC memory.

PCIe capabilities differ. The AMD part provides Gen 4 with 14 lanes (CPU only). The Intel part provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only).

Integrated graphics differ. The AMD part includes Radeon 840M. The Intel part lists N/A, meaning no integrated graphics.

The Intel part has a recorded launch MSRP of $196. The AMD part has no launch MSRP recorded in the database.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 uses the Zen 5 architecture under the codename Gorgon Point, part of the Ryzen AI PRO 400 generation. It is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core i5-14400F uses the Raptor Lake architecture under the codename Raptor Lake-R, part of the Core i5 Raptor Lake Refresh generation. It is built on a 10 nm process at Intel, with a die size of 215 mm².

Cache layouts differ significantly. Both parts have 80 KB of L1 per core. The AMD part has 1 MB of L2 per core and 4 MB of L3. The Intel part has 1.25 MB of L2 per core and 20 MB of shared L3. The Intel part's L3 cache is five times larger than the AMD part's L3 cache.

The AMD part's generation entry lists "Zen 5 / Zen 5c," indicating a hybrid core configuration within the same architecture family. The Intel part's generation entry lists "Raptor Lake Refresh," indicating a refresh of the existing Raptor Lake design rather than a new architecture.

The process node gap is notable: 4 nm TSMC versus 10 nm Intel. The AMD part's smaller process node aligns with its 28-watt TDP and mobile positioning. The Intel part's larger 10 nm node aligns with its 65-watt TDP and desktop positioning.

Both processors are production active. The AMD part has a release date of 2026-01-04, while the Intel part has a release date of 2024-01-07. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The AMD part's part number is 100-000001788, and the Intel part's part number is SRN3RSRN47.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-14400F wins every multithreaded and throughput-oriented workload in the head-to-head set. The largest margins come in physics (34.7% ahead), find prime numbers (33.7% ahead), data encryption (33.5% ahead), and floating point math (33% ahead). The Intel part also leads in data compression (26.2%), integer math (25.3%), multithread (25%), random string sorting (23.7%), and extended instructions (16.1%). These results make the Intel part the stronger choice for CPU-bound parallel tasks such as rendering, encoding, and scientific computing, based on the recorded scores.

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 wins only the single-thread tests, with a 1.5% margin over the Intel part in both passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread. This is a narrow lead, but it is consistent across both entries. The AMD part also holds a higher average benchmark score of 37762 versus 32279, indicating better overall standing in the database's full CPU ranking. Its 86th percentile placement versus Intel's 83rd percentile reinforces this.

The AMD part's advantages extend beyond raw scores. It has a 28-watt TDP against Intel's 65 watts, making it the more efficient option for power-constrained environments. It includes integrated Radeon 840M graphics, eliminating the need for a separate GPU in systems that do not require discrete graphics. It supports LPDDR5X memory, which is typical for mobile platforms, and it has a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s.

The Intel part has the advantage in PCIe capability with Gen 5 and 16 lanes versus the AMD part's Gen 4 and 14 lanes. It also has a larger shared L3 cache at 20 MB versus 4 MB, which contributes to its strong multithreaded showing.

The data supports a clear split: the Intel Core i5-14400F is the multithreaded performance leader on desktop, while the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 is the efficient mobile part with integrated graphics and a better overall average score.