AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440GE vs Intel Core i5-14400F Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440GE contains no benchmark scores, while the Intel Core i5-14400F has a full suite of measurements. This asymmetry means the comparison relies entirely on the Intel part's results and the AMD processor's architectural positioning.

The Intel Core i5-14400F delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21645 and a single-core score of 3055. In Geekbench, it records 11268 for multi-core and 2058 for single-core. The gap between these two tests is informative: the Cinebench R23 multi-core result is proportionally stronger relative to its single-core score than in Geekbench, suggesting the workload scaling differs across test methodologies.

PassMark results reinforce the multi-threaded strength of the Intel processor. The multithread score sits at 25470, while single-thread reaches 3701. Integer math posts 81524, floating point math 61319, and extended instructions 19937. Data compression hits 315521, data encryption 16949, and random string sorting 32680. Physics processing records 1523, and finding prime numbers scores 86.

Because the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440GE has no benchmark entries in the database, there are no head-to-head wins to attribute to either side. The wins count stands at zero for both processors. The Intel part's percentile ranking of 83 versus all CPUs provides context: it sits above roughly eight out of every ten processors in the database. The AMD part's percentile of 50 places it at the median of all recorded CPUs, though this ranking exists without any associated average benchmark score.

The nearest rivals for the Intel Core i5-14400F show how tightly grouped the competition is at this performance tier. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U averages 32233, just 0.1% below the Intel part. The Intel Core i9-11900 averages 32226, a 0.2% deficit. The AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS averages 32354, which is 0.2% above the i5-14400F. The Intel Core i7-12800H averages 32121, sitting 0.5% lower. These deltas are narrow, all within half a percentage point, indicating that the i5-14400F occupies a densely populated performance band where small variations in workload can flip the ranking.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear conclusion: the Intel Core i5-14400F is the only processor in this comparison with measured performance, and its results place it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs in the database. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440GE has a 50th percentile ranking but no average benchmark score and no recorded test results, making any direct performance assertion impossible from the recorded data.

The Intel part's average benchmark score of 32279 and its nearest rival deltas, all within 0.5%, show that it competes with established high-end mobile and desktop processors from the previous generation. The i5-14400F uses 16 threads across 10 cores, which explains its strong multi-threaded showing in Cinebench R23 and PassMark multithread tests.

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440GE presents a different profile on paper: 6 cores, 12 threads, a 35 watt TDP, and a 4.80 GHz boost clock. The Intel part draws 65 watts and boosts to 4.70 GHz. The AMD chip's lower TDP suggests a different design target, but without benchmark numbers, the database cannot confirm how that translates into application performance. The verdict from the recorded data is that the Intel Core i5-14400F has verifiable performance credentials, while the AMD processor remains unmeasured in this database.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440GE uses the Gorgon Point codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI PRO 400 generation built on Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. It is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 195 mm². The Intel Core i5-14400F uses Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-R, from the Core i5 Raptor Lake Refresh generation. Intel fabricates it on a 10 nm process with a die size of 215 mm².

The cache hierarchies diverge significantly. Both processors share an 80 KB L1 cache per core. The AMD part has 1 MB of L2 per core and 8 MB of L3 cache. The Intel part has 1.25 MB of L2 per core and a larger 20 MB shared L3 cache. This 12 MB difference in L3 capacity is substantial and likely contributes to the Intel processor's ability to handle data-heavy workloads without repeatedly accessing main memory.

The AMD processor integrates a Radeon 840M graphics unit, while the Intel Core i5-14400F has no integrated graphics at all. This makes the AMD part a more complete package for systems without a discrete GPU. The AMD processor also supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a measured bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the Intel part supports both DDR4 and DDR5 but has no recorded memory bandwidth figure in the database.

PCIe capabilities differ as well. The AMD processor provides Gen 4 with 12 lanes from the CPU. The Intel processor provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Intel part offers a newer PCIe generation and more lanes, which matters for high-bandwidth peripherals like modern GPUs and NVMe storage.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts establish the most immediate distinction. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440GE has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core i5-14400F has 10 cores and 16 threads. That is 4 additional cores and 4 additional threads on the Intel side.

Clock speeds differ in both directions. The AMD part has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Intel part has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The Intel chip runs 0.50 GHz higher at base, while the AMD chip runs 0.10 GHz higher at boost.

Thermal design power shows the largest relative gap. The AMD processor is rated at 35 watts, while the Intel processor is rated at 65 watts. The AMD part draws nearly half the power budget, which has implications for cooling requirements and system power envelopes. The AMD processor uses AMD Socket AM5, while the Intel processor uses Intel Socket 1700. These sockets are not interchangeable.

The process node difference is also notable: 4 nm for AMD versus 10 nm for Intel. The AMD part has a smaller die at 195 mm² versus 215 mm² for Intel. The Intel processor supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, giving it broader platform compatibility, whereas the AMD processor supports only DDR5. Both support ECC memory and both have locked multipliers, meaning neither offers manual overclocking via multiplier adjustment.

The launch MSRP for the Intel Core i5-14400F was $196. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440GE has no launch MSRP recorded in the database. The release dates differ by roughly two years: the Intel part launched in January 2024, while the AMD part is dated March 2026. Both are marked as active production status.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400F has 10 cores and 16 threads. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440GE has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What is the boost clock difference between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440GE boosts to 4.80 GHz, which is 0.10 GHz higher than the Intel Core i5-14400F's 4.70 GHz boost clock.

Q: Does either processor include integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440GE includes a Radeon 840M integrated GPU. The Intel Core i5-14400F has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440GE supports DDR5 only. The Intel Core i5-14400F supports both DDR4 and DDR5.

Q: Which processor has a higher percentile ranking in the database?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400F ranks in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440GE ranks in the 50th percentile.

Q: What is the TDP of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440GE has a 35 watt TDP. The Intel Core i5-14400F has a 65 watt TDP.

Q: How does the Intel Core i5-14400F compare to its nearest rivals?

A: Its average benchmark score of 32279 is 0.1% above the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U, 0.2% above the Intel Core i9-11900, 0.2% below the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS, and 0.5% above the Intel Core i7-12800H.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-14400F wins in every measured benchmark category because it is the only processor in this comparison with recorded scores. Its multi-threaded results are particularly strong. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21645 and PassMark multithread score of 25470 indicate that heavily parallel workloads, such as video rendering, 3D scene compilation, and scientific computation, will benefit from its 16 threads. The 20 MB shared L3 cache provides a large data footprint for working sets that exceed the 8 MB L3 available on the AMD processor.

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440GE wins on paper in several specification areas that do not require benchmark data. Its 35 watt TDP is nearly half the Intel part's 65 watt TDP, making it the more power-efficient choice for compact desktop builds or systems with modest cooling. Its 4.80 GHz boost clock edges out the Intel part's 4.70 GHz, potentially giving it an advantage in lightly threaded tasks that depend on raw clock speed, though no measured scores confirm this. The integrated Radeon 840M graphics unit means the AMD processor can power a display without a discrete GPU, which is not possible with the Intel Core i5-14400F.

The AMD processor's 4 nm process node from TSMC suggests a more modern manufacturing approach compared to Intel's 10 nm node, which may contribute to its lower power draw. The PCIe Gen 4 interface with 12 lanes on the AMD side is older and narrower than the PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes on the Intel side, giving the Intel processor a bandwidth advantage for expansion cards and storage.

For systems that prioritize low power consumption and integrated graphics, the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440GE presents the more suitable specification sheet. For workloads that demand high multi-threaded throughput and the database's measured performance confirms the Intel Core i5-14400F delivers, the Intel processor is the verified choice. The absence of any benchmark scores for the AMD processor means its actual performance remains an open question in the database, while the Intel part's results place it in a tightly contested tier where its nearest rivals sit within half a percentage point of its average score.