AMD Ryzen Embedded V1756B vs Intel Core i5-8400T Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents a remarkably consistent picture across the entire Cinebench suite: the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1756B wins every recorded comparison. The margin is narrow but uniform, hovering just above 8% in each test. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD part scores 692 against 633 for the Intel Core i5-8400T, a delta of -8.5% from the Intel side. The single-core R15 test shows the same pattern: 97 versus 89, a -8.2% gap.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1756B again leads in both workloads. Its multi-core score of 2884 eclipses the Intel 2638, while single-core 406 beats 372. The deltas are -8.5% and -8.4%, respectively. The story repeats in Cinebench R23: the AMD processor posts 6867 multi-core and 969 single-core, against 6282 and 886 for the Intel. The multi-core delta is -8.5% and single-core -8.6%.

Notably, the AMD processor wins every head-to-head benchmark despite having fewer physical cores. The Intel i5-8400T has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1756B has 4 cores and 8 threads. The AMD part compensates for its core deficit with simultaneous multithreading and a higher base clock of 3.25 GHz versus 1.70 GHz. The boost clocks are closer: 3.60 GHz for AMD versus 3.30 GHz for Intel.

The consistency of the margin is telling. Across all six comparisons, the delta never strays beyond -8.2% to -8.6%. This suggests the performance relationship between the two is stable across different render workloads and thread counts, rather than being workload-dependent. The Cinebench scores scale similarly between the two chips whether the test stresses one core or all available threads.

What the data does not show is any test where the Intel part pulls ahead. Its average benchmark score across the database is 2001, with a 45th percentile ranking among all CPUs. The AMD part averages 1986, placing at the 44th percentile. These overall averages are nearly identical, which makes the consistent Cinebench advantage for AMD slightly surprising. The Intel part does have Geekbench scores recorded: 4011 multi-core and 1100 single-core. No Geekbench results exist for the AMD part in this dataset, so a cross-application comparison is not possible from the recorded measurements.

The nearest rivals for each processor further contextualize the results. The Intel i5-8400T sits within 0.2% of the AMD Ryzen 7 2800H, Intel Core i5-8400H, Intel Xeon D-1712TR, and Intel Core i5-8300H in average score. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1756B is essentially tied with the Intel Core i5-8279U, Intel Xeon E3-1585L v5, Intel Xeon E3-1285L v4, and AMD Ryzen 5 1500X. Both chips occupy a crowded performance band where small deltas separate many products.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-8400T has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 2001, compared to 1986 for the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1756B. The Intel part also ranks one percentile higher, at 45 versus 44.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1756B win every Cinebench test?

A: Yes. The AMD processor wins all six recorded Cinebench comparisons: R15 multi-core and single-core, R20 multi-core and single-core, and R23 multi-core and single-core. The margins range from -8.2% to -8.6% from the Intel perspective.

Q: How do the core and thread counts differ?

A: The Intel Core i5-8400T has 6 cores and 6 threads. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1756B has 4 cores and 8 threads. Despite having fewer physical cores, the AMD part posts higher scores in every Cinebench test.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1756B has a base clock of 3.25 GHz and a boost clock of 3.60 GHz. The Intel Core i5-8400T has a base clock of 1.70 GHz and a boost clock of 3.30 GHz.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core i5-8400T has 9 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1756B has only 2 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: How do the integrated graphics compare?

A: The Intel Core i5-8400T includes UHD Graphics 630. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1756B includes Radeon Vega 8. The database does not record any graphics benchmark results for either processor.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1756B as the faster processor in Cinebench workloads. It wins every recorded comparison, with a consistent advantage of roughly 8.5% across multi-core and single-core tests. The AMD part achieves this with 4 cores and 8 threads, relying on simultaneous multithreading and a substantially higher base clock of 3.25 GHz.

The Intel Core i5-8400T is not without its own strengths. It has 6 physical cores, a larger shared L3 cache of 9 MB versus 2 MB, a lower 35 W TDP versus 45 W, and a higher overall average benchmark score of 2001 versus 1986. Its percentile ranking of 45 is one point higher than the AMD part's 44. The Intel chip also has recorded Geekbench scores of 4011 multi-core and 1100 single-core, which the AMD part lacks in this dataset.

For a buyer prioritizing raw Cinebench render performance, the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1756B is the clear choice from these measurements. Its wins are consistent and its margin is uniform. For a buyer prioritizing a lower thermal envelope, the Intel i5-8400T draws 35 W against the AMD's 45 W and offers more physical cores. The Intel part also carries the only recorded Geekbench results, which may matter for workloads outside Cinebench.

The two chips are nearly identical in overall average score, differing by only 15 points out of roughly 2000. This places them in the same performance tier, with the AMD part edging ahead specifically in Cinebench while the Intel part holds a marginal overall average advantage. Neither processor is a dominant winner across the full dataset; the AMD part wins the render tests, and the Intel part leads in the aggregate average.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification field. The Intel Core i5-8400T uses 6 cores and 6 threads, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1756B uses 4 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks are 1.70 GHz for Intel and 3.25 GHz for AMD. Boost clocks are 3.30 GHz for Intel and 3.60 GHz for AMD. The TDP rating is 35 W for Intel and 45 W for AMD.

The sockets are incompatible: the Intel part uses Intel Socket 1151, the AMD part uses AMD Socket FP5. The process nodes are the same at 14 nm, but the foundries differ: Intel fabricates its own chip, while GlobalFoundries produces the AMD part. The die sizes are 154 mm² for Intel and 210 mm² for AMD. The AMD processor has a transistor count of 4,950 million; no transistor count is recorded for the Intel part.

Cache hierarchies differ sharply. The Intel part has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 9 MB of shared L3. The AMD part has 128 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and only 2 MB of shared L3. Memory support is DDR4 dual-channel for both, but the Intel part has a recorded memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, while no bandwidth figure is recorded for the AMD part. Neither supports ECC memory.

PCIe support also differs: the Intel part lists Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while no PCIe information is recorded for the AMD part. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 630 for Intel and Radeon Vega 8 for AMD. The Intel part has a recorded launch MSRP of $182; the AMD part has no launch MSRP recorded. The Intel part is end-of-life, while the AMD part is active production. The Intel part released in April 2018; the AMD part released in February 2018.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core i5-8400T is built on Coffee Lake, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded V1756B uses the Zen architecture, specifically the Great Horned Owl variant. Both use a 14 nm process, but Intel uses its own foundry while AMD relies on GlobalFoundries. The transistor count for AMD is 4,950 million, a figure not recorded for Intel. The die sizes reflect the different designs: 154 mm² for Intel, 210 mm² for AMD.

The core designs diverge significantly. The Intel part offers 6 cores without simultaneous multithreading, meaning 6 threads total. The AMD part offers 4 cores with simultaneous multithreading, yielding 8 threads. This is a fundamental architectural difference: the Intel chip relies on more physical cores, while the AMD chip uses thread doubling to compete.

Cache architecture also reflects different design philosophies. The Intel chip provides a large shared L3 cache of 9 MB, but smaller per-core L1 and L2 caches at 64 KB and 256 KB respectively. The AMD chip provides larger per-core caches of 128 KB L1 and 512 KB L2, but a much smaller shared L3 of 2 MB. These trade-offs suggest different approaches to memory latency and bandwidth management.

The AMD part has a base clock nearly twice the Intel's: 3.25 GHz versus 1.70 GHz. The boost clocks are closer at 3.60 GHz versus 3.30 GHz. The Intel part compensates with a lower 35 W TDP, while the AMD part draws 45 W. The Intel part supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes; no PCIe specification is recorded for the AMD part. Both support DDR4 dual-channel memory, but the Intel part has a measured memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s.

The integrated graphics differ as well: Intel's UHD Graphics 630 versus AMD's Radeon Vega 8. Neither has recorded graphics benchmarks in this dataset, so the practical impact of these differences cannot be quantified from the available data. The Intel part is end-of-life and was released in April 2018, while the AMD part remains active production and was released in February 2018.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V1756B wins every recorded Cinebench benchmark. This includes R15 multi-core at 692 versus 633, R15 single-core at 97 versus 89, R20 multi-core at 2884 versus 2638, R20 single-core at 406 versus 372, R23 multi-core at 6867 versus 6282, and R23 single-core at 969 versus 886. The margin is consistent at roughly 8.5% across all tests. This makes the AMD part the preferred choice for render workloads and any application where Cinebench scores are representative.

The Intel Core i5-8400T wins the overall average benchmark score comparison, 2001 versus 1986. It also holds the higher percentile ranking at 45 versus 44. The Intel part is the only one with recorded Geekbench scores: 4011 multi-core and 1100 single-core. For workloads modeled by Geekbench, the Intel part has documented data while the AMD part has none.

The Intel part also holds advantages in specifications that may translate to real-world benefits in certain scenarios. Its 6 physical cores could benefit workloads that scale poorly with simultaneous multithreading. Its 9 MB shared L3 cache is more than four times larger than the AMD's 2 MB, which could aid cache-sensitive tasks. Its 35 W TDP is 10 W lower than the AMD's 45 W, making it more suitable for thermally constrained systems. The Intel part also has a recorded memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, while the AMD part has no such figure.

The AMD part counters with higher clock speeds, including a 3.25 GHz base clock that is nearly double the Intel's 1.70 GHz. Its 8 threads provide more parallel execution contexts despite fewer physical cores. Its larger per-core L1 and L2 caches may reduce latency for certain access patterns. Its Radeon Vega 8 integrated graphics differ from Intel's UHD Graphics 630, though no benchmark data exists to quantify the graphics gap.

The production status difference matters for procurement decisions: the Intel part is end-of-life, while the AMD part is still active. The AMD part also has a recorded transistor count of 4,950 million and a larger die at 210 mm², while the Intel part uses 154 mm². For Cinebench-style workloads, the AMD part is the clear winner. For broader application coverage and a lower thermal envelope, the Intel part offers documented advantages in the aggregate score and recorded Geekbench results.