AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C18I vs Intel Core i5-11400T Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a consistent, though not overwhelming, advantage for the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C18I across every recorded test. In the Cinebench R15 multicore test, the AMD part scores 1187 against the Intel Core i5-11400T's 1120, a 5.6% lead. The single-core result in the same test follows the same pattern: 167 for the AMD chip versus 157 for Intel, a 6% gap. These margins are small enough that they would likely be imperceptible in everyday use, but they are uniform across every workload measured.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the Ryzen Embedded V3C18I again takes the win in both categories. Multicore performance lands at 4946 versus 4667, another 5.6% advantage. The single-core score of 698 against 658 represents a 5.7% lead. The pattern holds in Cinebench R23, the most demanding of the three render tests. The AMD processor scores 11777 in multicore, while the Intel chip manages 11113, a 5.6% difference. Single-core R23 results show 1662 for AMD and 1569 for Intel, again a 5.6% gap.

The database also records Geekbench scores for the Intel processor, which are not mirrored in the AMD test set. The i5-11400T posts 5591 in multicore and 1597 in single-core. Since no matching Geekbench result exists for the Ryzen Embedded V3C18I, a direct comparison in that benchmark is not possible from the recorded data.

Looking at the broader context, the average benchmark score for the AMD part is 3406, placing it in the 54th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel chip averages 3309, also in the 54th percentile. The nearest rivals to the AMD processor include the Intel Xeon E-2236 with an average score of 3410, a 0.1% difference, and the Intel Xeon E-2146G at the same score. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 7530U sits close behind at 3394, 0.4% lower. For the Intel i5-11400T, the closest competitors are the AMD Ryzen 3 5300G and AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2600, both at 3303, just 0.2% behind, and the Intel Core i5-11500T at 3288, 0.6% behind. The Intel Core i7-7800X actually scores higher at 3333, giving it a 0.7% edge over the i5-11400T.

What these numbers indicate is a processor that wins every head-to-head benchmark, but never by a large margin. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C18I is consistently about 6% faster than the Intel Core i5-11400T in single-threaded tests and about 5.6% faster in multi-threaded tests. This is a uniform performance advantage, not one that appears only in specific workload types.

The Verdict

The data does not present a difficult choice. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C18I wins every benchmark recorded in the head-to-head comparison. It is ahead in all three Cinebench versions, both single-core and multicore, with deltas ranging from 5.6% to 6%. If the decision rests purely on measured performance, the AMD part is the stronger option.

However, the context matters. The Intel Core i5-11400T is a desktop part from the Rocket Lake generation, released in March 2021 and now marked as end-of-life. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C18I, based on Zen 3+ Rembrandt architecture, was released in September 2022 and remains in active production. The AMD chip also carries a 15 W TDP compared to 35 W for the Intel part, which is a substantial difference in power efficiency given that the AMD chip is also the faster one.

Who should pick the Intel Core i5-11400T? The data supports it only for scenarios where the Intel Socket 1200 platform is already in place, or where the integrated UHD Graphics 730 is required, since the AMD part has no integrated graphics listed. The Intel chip also supports DDR4 memory, which may be an advantage for users upgrading an existing system rather than building fresh.

Who should pick the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C18I? The data clearly favors it for new builds where performance and efficiency are priorities. It offers 8 cores and 16 threads against the Intel chip's 6 cores and 12 threads, a higher boost clock of 3.80 GHz versus 3.70 GHz, a smaller 6 nm process node versus 14 nm, DDR5 memory support, ECC memory, and a higher memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s versus 51.2 GB/s. In every measurable way from the recorded data, the AMD part is the superior processor.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies and manufacturing processes. The Intel Core i5-11400T uses the Rocket Lake architecture, built on Intel's 14 nm process node with a die size of 276 mm². The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C18I uses the Zen 3+ architecture, codenamed Rembrandt, manufactured by TSMC on a 6 nm process. The AMD part does not have a recorded die size, but the process node difference alone is significant: 14 nm versus 6 nm.

Core and thread counts differ as well. The Intel chip provides 6 cores and 12 threads, while the AMD chip provides 8 cores and 16 threads. This gives the AMD processor a 33% advantage in thread count, which helps explain its multicore performance lead despite the relatively small benchmark delta.

Cache layouts also differ. The Intel Core i5-11400T has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C18I has 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD chip offers more total L3, though its per-core L1 is smaller.

Memory architecture is another major split. The Intel processor supports DDR4 memory on a dual-channel bus with 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth and no ECC support. The AMD processor supports DDR5 memory, also dual-channel, with 76.8 GB/s of bandwidth and ECC support enabled. Both processors provide PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU.

The AMD chip includes ECC memory support, which is notable for embedded and reliability-focused workloads. The Intel chip does not. The Intel chip includes integrated UHD Graphics 730, while the AMD part lists no integrated graphics at all. The AMD processor uses the AMD Socket FP7, while the Intel processor uses Intel Socket 1200.

Specification Differences

The base clock speeds differ substantially. The Intel Core i5-11400T runs at 1300 MHz base, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C18I runs at 1900 MHz base. Boost clocks are closer: 3.70 GHz for Intel and 3.80 GHz for AMD. The AMD part has a 15 W TDP, less than half of the Intel part's 35 W TDP.

The Intel processor has a launch MSRP of $182 and a part number of SRKP2. The AMD processor has no recorded launch MSRP and uses part number 100-000000559. The Intel chip was released on March 15, 2021, while the AMD chip was released on September 26, 2022. The Intel chip is marked end-of-life, while the AMD chip is in active production. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

The Intel part is from the Core 11th Gen series, specifically the Core i5 Rocket Lake-S generation. The AMD part is from the Ryzen Embedded line, specifically the Zen 3+ Rembrandt generation. The Intel chip uses a 276 mm² die, while no die size is recorded for the AMD chip. Transistor counts are not recorded for either processor.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C18I wins every multi-threaded benchmark. It scores 1187 versus 1120 in Cinebench R15, 4946 versus 4667 in R20, and 11777 versus 11113 in R23. Each result is a 5.6% advantage over the Intel Core i5-11400T.

Q: How do the single-core scores compare?

A: The AMD part also wins all single-core tests. It scores 167 versus 157 in Cinebench R15, a 6% lead, 698 versus 658 in R20, a 5.7% lead, and 1662 versus 1569 in R23, a 5.6% lead.

Q: Does the Intel processor have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the Intel Core i5-11400T includes UHD Graphics 730. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C18I has no integrated graphics listed in the data.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C18I supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i5-11400T does not.

Q: What memory types do these processors support?

A: The Intel processor supports DDR4 memory with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD processor supports DDR5 memory with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth. Both use dual-channel memory buses.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C18I has a 15 W TDP, while the Intel Core i5-11400T has a 35 W TDP. The AMD part consumes less than half the power while still outperforming the Intel chip in every recorded benchmark.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C18I wins every benchmark category recorded in the database. It takes all three Cinebench versions in both single-core and multicore testing. Its advantages range from 5.6% to 6%, which is a consistent margin across the board. The AMD part also wins on efficiency, with a 15 W TDP against the Intel chip's 35 W. It offers more cores, more threads, a newer process node, faster memory support, ECC capability, and higher memory bandwidth. For any workload that benefits from CPU compute, render performance, or power efficiency, the data points squarely at the AMD processor.

The Intel Core i5-11400T does not win any recorded benchmark against the AMD part, but it does hold advantages in specific areas that may matter in certain builds. It has integrated UHD Graphics 730, which means a system using this processor does not require a discrete GPU for basic display output. It supports DDR4 memory, which is generally more common and may allow for reuse of existing memory modules. It also has a recorded launch MSRP of $182, which provides a price reference point, though the AMD part has no recorded price. The Intel chip's closest rivals in the database, the AMD Ryzen 3 5300G and AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2600, both score 3303 on average, nearly identical to the Intel chip's 3309.

For use cases, the AMD Ryzen Embedded V3C18I is the better choice for embedded systems, servers, or compact builds where the 15 W TDP and ECC memory support are critical. The Intel Core i5-11400T makes sense for a desktop build on the Intel Socket 1200 platform, particularly if integrated graphics are needed or if the builder prefers DDR4 memory. The data cannot justify choosing the Intel part for raw performance, since the AMD processor wins every recorded test. The Intel chip's case rests entirely on platform compatibility, integrated graphics availability, and the existing DDR4 ecosystem.