AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B vs Intel Core i5-2400 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B and Intel Core i5-2400 are two very different processors separated by seven years of architectural evolution, yet their overall benchmark averages land within one percent of each other. The AMD chip posts an average benchmark score of 1196, while the Intel chip scores 1187, a difference of less than 0.8%. However, this overall parity masks a dramatic split in workload performance: the Ryzen V1605B dominates in single-threaded and early multi-threaded tests, while the Intel i5-2400 fights back decisively in the modern Cinebench R23 multi-core test. The data tells a story of generational trade-offs, where the newer AMD part’s efficiency and per-core strength collide with the older Intel part’s higher base clock and larger shared cache.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most lopsided result in the head-to-head comparison comes from Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B scores 654 against the Intel Core i5-2400’s 329. That is a 98.8% advantage for the AMD part, effectively doubling the Intel chip’s output. This test heavily rewards the Ryzen’s simultaneous multithreading (SMT), as it processes eight threads versus the Intel’s four. The Ryzen’s 15-watt TDP and Zen architecture deliver this result while consuming a fraction of the power budget, making the win particularly notable given the Intel part’s 95-watt TDP.

In single-core performance, the Ryzen V1605B again takes the lead, scoring 841 in Cinebench R23 single-core versus 462 for the i5-2400. That’s an 82% improvement, a massive gap that reflects the architectural leap from 32nm Sandy Bridge to 14nm Zen. The Ryzen’s base clock of 2000 MHz is lower than the Intel’s 3100 MHz, but its boost clock of 3.60 GHz nearly matches the Intel’s 3.40 GHz boost, and the newer architecture extracts far more instructions per clock. The result is that the Ryzen delivers superior single-threaded performance despite a lower nominal frequency.

However, the Intel i5-2400 does not go down without a fight. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel part scores 3272 against the Ryzen’s 3160, a 3.4% margin in favor of the older chip. This is a surprising reversal given the Ryzen’s R15 multi-core dominance. The explanation lies in the cache hierarchy: the Intel part has 6 MB of shared L3 cache, three times the Ryzen’s 2 MB shared L3. Additionally, the Intel’s higher base clock of 3100 MHz allows sustained throughput on all four cores without relying on boost behavior. The Ryzen’s eight threads provide a theoretical advantage, but the Intel chip’s larger cache and higher sustained clock win out in this particular workload.

Across the three head-to-head benchmarks, the AMD Ryzen V1605B wins two, while the Intel Core i5-2400 wins one. The margins tell the story: the AMD wins are decisive (98.8% and 82%), while the Intel win is narrow (3.4%). This pattern suggests that the Ryzen is the stronger all-around performer, but the Intel retains a niche advantage in specific sustained multi-core tasks.

The Verdict

The data points to the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B as the superior processor for most users, but with a clear caveat. The Ryzen wins decisively in single-core performance (82% ahead in Cinebench R23 single-core) and in the older Cinebench R15 multi-core test (98.8% ahead). It also achieves this with a 15-watt TDP versus the Intel’s 95-watt TDP, making it dramatically more power-efficient. For anyone building a system where energy consumption, heat output, or modern single-threaded responsiveness matters, the Ryzen is the obvious choice.

The Intel Core i5-2400, however, is not obsolete in every scenario. Its 3.4% win in Cinebench R23 multi-core, combined with its 6 MB of shared L3 cache, indicates that it can handle certain sustained multi-threaded workloads competitively. That said, the Intel part is end-of-life, while the AMD part is active, and the Intel’s 32nm process node is two generations behind the AMD’s 14nm node. The Intel chip’s higher base clock (3100 MHz vs 2000 MHz) helps it in tasks that scale with frequency rather than thread count, but the Ryzen’s boost clock nearly matches it while offering twice the thread count.

The overall percentile rankings confirm the close contest: the Ryzen sits at the 34th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel sits at the 33rd percentile. The average benchmark scores (1196 vs 1187) are within 0.8%, meaning that for a mixed workload, the two are near-identical in overall output. But the Ryzen achieves this parity with far lower power consumption and a newer feature set, making it the better recommendation for new builds. The Intel i5-2400 is a capable part for legacy systems or niche use cases where its specific cache configuration and sustained clock speed are advantageous, but the data favors the Ryzen for general-purpose use.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is generational. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B uses the Zen architecture on a 14nm process node, manufactured by GlobalFoundries. It integrates 4,950 million transistors on a 210 mm² die. The Intel Core i5-2400 uses the Sandy Bridge architecture on a 32nm process node, manufactured by Intel, with 1,160 million transistors on a 216 mm² die. The transistor count difference is stark: the Ryzen packs over four times as many transistors into a slightly smaller die, enabling its superior per-core performance and SMT capabilities.

Cache configurations differ significantly. The Ryzen provides 128 KB of L1 cache per core and 512 KB of L2 cache per core, with 2 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core, but steps up to 6 MB of shared L3 cache. This gives the Intel chip three times the L3 cache, which explains its narrow win in the Cinebench R23 multi-core test where larger cache helps with data reuse. The Ryzen compensates with larger per-core L1 and L2 caches, which boost single-threaded performance.

Memory support also differs. The Ryzen supports DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus, while the Intel supports DDR3 with a dual-channel bus. The Ryzen’s integrated graphics are Radeon Vega 8, a substantial step up from the Intel HD 2000. The Ryzen is built on the AMD Socket FP5, while the Intel uses the Intel Socket 1155. The Ryzen’s production status is active, while the Intel is end-of-life. The Ryzen’s codename is Zen (Great Horned Owl), released in 2018, while the Intel’s codename is Sandy Bridge, released in 2011. The Intel part has a part number of SR00Q, while the Ryzen does not list one.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every core specification. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core i5-2400 has 4 cores and 4 threads. The Ryzen’s base clock is 2000 MHz, while the Intel’s is 3100 MHz. The Ryzen’s boost clock is 3.60 GHz, while the Intel’s is 3.40 GHz. The Ryzen has a TDP of 15 watts, while the Intel has a TDP of 95 watts. The Ryzen uses the AMD Socket FP5, while the Intel uses the Intel Socket 1155.

The process node and foundry differ: the Ryzen is on 14nm from GlobalFoundries, while the Intel is on 32nm from Intel. The Ryzen has 4,950 million transistors on a 210 mm² die, while the Intel has 1,160 million transistors on a 216 mm² die. L1 cache is 128 KB per core for the Ryzen versus 64 KB per core for the Intel. L2 cache is 512 KB per core for the Ryzen versus 256 KB per core for the Intel. L3 cache is 2 MB shared for the Ryzen versus 6 MB shared for the Intel. Memory support is DDR4 for the Ryzen versus DDR3 for the Intel. Integrated graphics are Radeon Vega 8 for the Ryzen versus Intel HD 2000 for the Intel. The PCIe support is not listed for the Ryzen, while the Intel has Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The release dates are 2018-02-20 for the Ryzen versus 2011-01-08 for the Intel. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, and both lack ECC memory support.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B is significantly ahead, scoring 841 in Cinebench R23 single-core versus the Intel Core i5-2400’s 462, an 82% advantage.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-2400 win any benchmark against the Ryzen V1605B?

A: Yes, the Intel wins the Cinebench R23 multi-core test, scoring 3272 versus the Ryzen’s 3160, a 3.4% margin.

Q: What is the TDP difference between these two processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen V1605B has a TDP of 15 watts, while the Intel Core i5-2400 has a TDP of 95 watts, making the AMD part substantially more power-efficient.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen V1605B has an average benchmark score of 1196, while the Intel Core i5-2400 has an average of 1187, a difference of less than 1%.

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen V1605B has 8 threads, while the Intel Core i5-2400 has 4 threads, giving the AMD part a 2-to-1 thread advantage.

Q: What is the L3 cache size difference?

A: The Intel Core i5-2400 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache, while the AMD Ryzen V1605B has 2 MB of shared L3 cache, a 3-to-1 advantage for the Intel part.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1605B wins in scenarios that favor single-threaded performance, lower power consumption, and modern memory. Its 82% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core makes it the clear choice for applications that rely heavily on per-core speed, such as older games, lightly-threaded productivity tools, or responsive desktop use. Its 98.8% win in Cinebench R15 multi-core also makes it strong for moderately-threaded workloads that scale with SMT, like video encoding or 3D rendering in older software versions. The 15-watt TDP makes it ideal for compact or fanless builds, embedded systems, or any environment where heat and energy are constraints. The DDR4 memory support provides a modern upgrade path, and the Radeon Vega 8 integrated graphics are far more capable than the Intel HD 2000, making the Ryzen suitable for light gaming or media playback without a discrete GPU.

The Intel Core i5-2400 wins in the specific case of sustained, cache-hungry multi-threaded workloads, as demonstrated by its 3.4% win in Cinebench R23 multi-core. Its 6 MB of shared L3 cache and higher base clock of 3100 MHz allow it to maintain throughput in tasks that repeatedly access a working set larger than 2 MB. This makes it a viable option for legacy systems running specific multi-threaded applications that were optimized for Sandy Bridge-era cache hierarchies. Its higher TDP of 95 watts is a disadvantage, but in a desktop with adequate cooling, it can sustain its clock speeds without thermal throttling. The Intel part is end-of-life, so it is best suited for existing systems or budget upgrades where the motherboard and DDR3 memory are already in place. For new builds, the data overwhelmingly favors the Ryzen V1605B due to its power efficiency, thread count, and single-core dominance, even though the Intel chip edges out a narrow victory in one modern multi-core benchmark.