AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 vs Intel Core i5-10400F Comparison

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 and Intel Core i5-10400F are both 6-core, 12-thread desktop processors, yet benchmark results show they are built for entirely different priorities. The Intel chip dominates nearly every performance metric, winning 16 of 17 head-to-head comparisons, while the AMD part’s sole victory is a staggering one in data encryption. The average benchmark scores are close — 14,336 for AMD versus 14,185 for Intel, a 1.1% gap — but that aggregate masks a clear performance hierarchy where Intel leads in most workloads and AMD counters with exceptional cryptographic throughput and dramatically lower power draw.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core i5-10400F is the clear winner in raw compute, and the margin is consistent across Cinebench versions. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, Intel scores 10,283 against AMD’s 8,207, a 20.2% advantage. Single-core R23 shows the same 20.2% delta: Intel at 1,451 versus AMD’s 1,158. This pattern repeats in R20 and R15, with Intel ahead by 20.2% in R20 multi-core (4,318 vs 3,446) and 20.5% in R15 single-core (146 vs 116). The consistency suggests a fundamental clock-speed and architecture advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The gap widens further in PassMark’s integer and floating-point math tests. Intel leads integer math 41,471 to 30,739, a 25.9% margin, and floating-point math 25,956 to 18,534, a 28.6% gap. Extended instructions show a 29.6% Intel lead (12,500 vs 8,799). The single-thread PassMark result is decisive: Intel scores 2,541 versus AMD’s 1,609, a 36.7% advantage. This single-thread deficit is the AMD part’s biggest weakness, and it directly impacts passmark_physics, where Intel leads 696 to 441 (36.6% ahead).

The most lopsided Intel wins come in memory and sorting workloads. Random string sorting shows Intel at 23,185 versus AMD’s 13,926, a 39.9% lead. Data compression follows at 26.8% in Intel’s favor (185,944 vs 136,097). Prime number finding is 37.1% better on Intel (35 vs 22). These results indicate Intel’s Comet Lake design handles memory-access-heavy and branch-heavy workloads substantially better than AMD’s Renoir embedded part.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546’s only win is in PassMark data encryption, where it scores 8,046 against Intel’s 4,100. That 96.2% advantage is enormous and suggests hardware-accelerated cryptography or a more efficient AES implementation. This is not a marginal win; AMD nearly doubles Intel’s encryption throughput. For workloads involving VPNs, secure storage, or any heavy cryptographic processing, the AMD part is the superior choice by a wide margin.

Architecture Differences

The two chips are built on fundamentally different process nodes and architectures. AMD uses TSMC’s 7 nm process with the Zen 2 architecture (codename Renoir), while Intel relies on its own 14 nm process with the Comet Lake architecture. The transistor count reflects this: AMD packs 9,800 million transistors into a 156 mm² die, while Intel does not disclose transistor counts or die size. This density advantage allows AMD to achieve a 35 W TDP versus Intel’s 65 W TDP — a 30 W difference that makes the AMD part far more power-efficient on paper.

Cache configurations differ significantly. Both have 64 KB L1 per core, but AMD provides 512 KB L2 per core versus Intel’s 256 KB per core. AMD’s L3 cache is 8 MB shared, while Intel offers 12 MB shared. The larger L2 on AMD suggests better per-core data locality, but Intel’s larger L3 pool likely helps in multi-threaded shared workloads, which aligns with its consistent multi-core benchmark wins.

Memory support is another differentiator. Both support DDR4 in dual-channel mode, but AMD’s memory bandwidth is rated at 51.2 GB/s versus Intel’s 42.7 GB/s. AMD also supports ECC memory, while Intel does not. PCIe lanes favor AMD as well: 20 Gen 3 lanes versus Intel’s 16 Gen 3 lanes. AMD includes integrated Radeon Graphics with 384 shader processors, while Intel’s F-series chip has no integrated graphics. Sockets differ completely: AMD uses Socket FP6, Intel uses Socket 1200.

Clock speeds tell the performance story. AMD runs at 3.00 GHz base and 3.95 GHz boost, while Intel runs at 2.90 GHz base but boosts to 4.30 GHz. Intel’s higher boost clock is the likely driver of its 36.7% single-thread PassMark advantage. AMD’s lower TDP and boost clock suggest a thermal design focused on constrained embedded environments, while Intel pushes for maximum throughput at higher power.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in multi-core rendering workloads?

A: The Intel Core i5-10400F wins all multi-core Cinebench tests by 20.2%. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, Intel scores 10,283 versus AMD’s 8,207. PassMark multithread also favors Intel at 12,115 versus 9,656, a 20.3% lead.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 win any benchmark?

A: Yes, it wins PassMark data encryption with a score of 8,046 versus Intel’s 4,100, a 96.2% advantage. This is its only head-to-head win out of 17 benchmarks.

Q: How do the TDP ratings compare?

A: The AMD part has a 35 W TDP, while the Intel part is rated at 65 W. This 30 W difference makes AMD significantly more power-efficient, though it comes with lower clock speeds.

Q: Do both CPUs support ECC memory?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 supports ECC memory, but the Intel Core i5-10400F does not. This gives AMD an edge in reliability-critical server or storage applications.

Q: Which CPU has a higher boost clock?

A: Intel boosts to 4.30 GHz, while AMD boosts to 3.95 GHz. Intel’s higher boost clock contributes to its substantial single-thread performance lead, which is 36.7% in PassMark single-thread testing.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference?

A: AMD averages 14,336 across all benchmarks, while Intel averages 14,185. AMD is 1.1% ahead in this aggregate metric, despite losing 16 of 17 individual tests, due to its massive encryption score.

Specification Differences

• Process Node: AMD uses 7 nm (TSMC); Intel uses 14 nm (Intel).
• Transistors: AMD has 9,800 million; Intel does not disclose.
• Die Size: AMD is 156 mm²; Intel does not disclose.
• L2 Cache: AMD has 512 KB per core; Intel has 256 KB per core.
• L3 Cache: AMD has 8 MB shared; Intel has 12 MB shared.
• TDP: AMD is 35 W; Intel is 65 W.
• Base Clock: AMD is 3.00 GHz; Intel is 2.90 GHz.
• Boost Clock: AMD is 3.95 GHz; Intel is 4.30 GHz.
• Memory Bandwidth: AMD is 51.2 GB/s; Intel is 42.7 GB/s.
• ECC Memory: AMD supports; Intel does not.
• PCIe Lanes: AMD has 20 Gen 3 lanes; Intel has 16 Gen 3 lanes.
• Integrated Graphics: AMD has Radeon Graphics 384SP; Intel has none.
• Socket: AMD uses Socket FP6; Intel uses Socket 1200.
• Release Date: AMD launched 2020-11-09; Intel launched 2020-04-29.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i5-10400F is the faster processor for general and multi-threaded workloads. It wins every Cinebench test by 20.2%, every PassMark math test by 25.9% to 37.1%, and memory-intensive tasks by up to 39.9%. Its higher boost clock of 4.30 GHz versus 3.95 GHz delivers a 36.7% single-thread PassMark lead. For any workload that prioritizes raw compute, rendering, or data processing, Intel is the correct choice.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 is the right pick for specific edge cases. Its 96.2% lead in data encryption makes it superior for cryptographic workloads. Its 35 W TDP versus 65 W makes it far better for power-constrained designs. ECC memory support and integrated graphics add capabilities Intel lacks entirely. Its higher memory bandwidth (51.2 GB/s vs 42.7 GB/s) and extra PCIe lanes (20 vs 16) also favor AMD for embedded system expansion.

The aggregate benchmark average slightly favors AMD (14,336 vs 14,185, a 1.1% difference), but that is entirely driven by the encryption outlier. Outside of encryption, Intel wins every test. If you need maximum encryption throughput, low power draw, ECC memory, or integrated graphics, choose AMD. If you need the fastest possible performance in the other 16 benchmark categories, choose Intel.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 wins in:

• Data encryption, scoring 8,046 versus 4,100, a 96.2% advantage.
• Power efficiency, with a 35 W TDP versus Intel’s 65 W.
• Reliability features, offering ECC memory support that Intel lacks.
• System expansion, with 20 PCIe Gen 3 lanes versus Intel’s 16.
• Integrated graphics capability, providing Radeon Graphics 384SP versus no iGPU on Intel.
• Memory bandwidth, rated at 51.2 GB/s versus 42.7 GB/s.

Intel Core i5-10400F wins in:

• All Cinebench tests (R15, R20, R23), both single and multi-core, by 20.2% to 20.5%.
• PassMark single-thread performance, 2,541 versus 1,609, a 36.7% lead.
• PassMark multithread, 12,115 versus 9,656, a 20.3% lead.
• Integer math, 41,471 versus 30,739, a 25.9% lead.
• Floating-point math, 25,956 versus 18,534, a 28.6% lead.
• Data compression, 185,944 versus 136,097, a 26.8% lead.
• Random string sorting, 23,185 versus 13,926, a 39.9% lead.
• Physics simulation, 696 versus 441, a 36.6% lead.
• Prime number finding, 35 versus 22, a 37.1% lead.
• Extended instructions, 12,500 versus 8,799, a 29.6% lead.