AMD Ryzen 5 2400GE vs Intel Core i7-980X Comparison

# AMD Ryzen 5 2400GE vs Intel Core i7-980X

The AMD Ryzen 5 2400GE and Intel Core i7-980X represent two very different eras of desktop computing, yet benchmark results place them in the same performance tier. The Ryzen 5 2400GE, built on AMD's 14nm Zen architecture with a 35W TDP, consistently outperforms the older 32nm Westmere-based Core i7-980X across every Cinebench test in this comparison, despite the Intel chip's advantage in core count and thread count. The 2400GE wins all six head-to-head benchmarks, with margins ranging from 4.9% to 5.5%, and both processors sit at the 41st percentile among all CPUs, indicating that despite their generational gap, they occupy nearly identical positions in the overall performance landscape.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking pattern in this matchup is the uniformity of AMD's victory across the entire Cinebench suite. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ryzen 5 2400GE scores 615 against the Core i7-980X's 584, a 5.3% advantage. The single-core R15 result shows a slightly smaller gap of 4.9%, with scores of 86 and 82 respectively. Moving to Cinebench R20, the 2400GE extends its lead to 5.3% in multi-core (2564 vs 2434) and 5.5% in single-core (362 vs 343). The R23 results continue this trend with a 5.3% multi-core margin (6107 vs 5797) and a 5.4% single-core margin (862 vs 818).

These numbers tell a clear story: the Ryzen 5 2400GE is faster in every measured workload, regardless of whether the test scales across multiple cores or relies on single-thread performance. The most significant win for AMD comes in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the 5.5% delta represents the largest gap in the entire comparison. The consistency of these margins—all falling between 4.9% and 5.5%—suggests that the architectural efficiency of Zen more than compensates for the Core i7-980X's additional two cores and four threads.

The Core i7-980X's higher base clock of 3.33 GHz and boost clock of 3.60 GHz do not translate into benchmark victories against the 2400GE's 3.20 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost. Even in multi-threaded workloads where the 980X's 6-core/12-thread configuration should theoretically provide an advantage, the 2400GE's 4-core/8-thread design with its 14nm process node and newer architecture emerges ahead. The average benchmark scores reflect this near-parity with a slight edge to AMD: the 2400GE averages 1766 across all benchmarks, while the 980X averages 1746.

Looking at the nearest rivals for context, the Ryzen 5 2400GE sits between the Intel Core i7-4870HQ (1769, -0.2% delta) and the Intel Xeon E-2224 (1762, +0.2% delta). The Core i7-980X similarly sits between the Intel Core i5-8269U (1748, -0.1% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 3200GE (1750, -0.2% delta). These rival positions confirm that both processors perform at the same level as mid-range laptop and desktop chips from later generations, though the 2400GE edges out its competitor in the head-to-head comparison.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 2400GE wins in every benchmark category measured in this comparison, making a case for its superiority in both single-threaded and multi-threaded applications. For tasks that rely heavily on single-core performance—such as older games, lightly-threaded productivity applications, or everyday desktop responsiveness—the 2400GE's 4.9% to 5.5% single-core advantage suggests a tangible difference in user experience. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 862 versus 818 for the 980X represents a meaningful gap that would manifest in faster application launches and smoother interaction with single-threaded software.

In multi-threaded workloads like video rendering, 3D modeling, or batch photo processing, the 2400GE also takes the win, despite having fewer physical cores. The R23 multi-core score of 6107 versus 5797 shows that the Zen architecture's efficiency, combined with simultaneous multithreading, allows the 4-core chip to outperform the 6-core Westmere processor. This is particularly notable given that the 980X has 12 threads available versus the 2400GE's 8 threads—the newer architecture simply extracts more work per thread.

The Intel Core i7-980X, however, does hold advantages outside of raw benchmark scores that could matter in specific use cases. Its triple-channel DDR3 memory bus, while not providing a bandwidth figure in the data, offers a wider memory path compared to the 2400GE's dual-channel DDR4 support. For applications that are highly memory-bandwidth sensitive, the 980X's memory configuration could potentially narrow the performance gap, though no benchmark data confirms this. Additionally, the 980X's 12 MB of shared L3 cache—three times the 2400GE's 4 MB—might benefit workloads with large working sets that fit within cache.

The 2400GE also brings integrated Radeon RX Vega 11 graphics, which the 980X completely lacks. This makes the AMD chip suitable for systems without a discrete GPU, whereas the Intel processor requires a separate graphics card for any display output. For compact or low-power builds where a discrete GPU is undesirable, the 2400GE is the clear choice, though its 35W TDP versus the 980X's 130W TDP makes it far more suitable for small form factor systems.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 2400GE wins all three multi-core Cinebench tests: R15 (615 vs 584, +5.3%), R20 (2564 vs 2434, +5.3%), and R23 (6107 vs 5797, +5.3%).

Q: Does the Intel Core i7-980X's higher core count give it any advantage?

A: No. Despite having 6 cores and 12 threads versus the 2400GE's 4 cores and 8 threads, the 980X loses every multi-core benchmark by a 5.3% margin. The newer Zen architecture in the 2400GE delivers better per-core efficiency.

Q: How do these processors compare to other CPUs in the database?

A: Both sit at the 41st percentile among all CPUs. The 2400GE's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-4870HQ (1769 avg score, -0.2% delta) and Intel Xeon E-2224 (1762, +0.2% delta). The 980X's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-8269U (1748, -0.1% delta) and AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 3200GE (1750, -0.2% delta).

Q: Which processor supports integrated graphics?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen 5 2400GE includes integrated graphics (Radeon RX Vega 11). The Intel Core i7-980X has no integrated graphics capability and requires a discrete GPU.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The 2400GE has a TDP of 35W, while the 980X has a TDP of 130W—a significant difference that makes the AMD chip suitable for low-power builds.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: Yes, both the Ryzen 5 2400GE and the Core i7-980X have unlocked multipliers, allowing users to adjust clock speeds beyond stock settings.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification category. The Ryzen 5 2400GE uses a 4-core/8-thread configuration, while the Core i7-980X offers 6 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks are close—3.20 GHz for AMD versus 3.33 GHz for Intel—but the boost clocks diverge with the 2400GE at 3.80 GHz and the 980X at 3.60 GHz. The most dramatic difference is TDP: the 2400GE draws 35W versus the 980X's 130W.

Socket compatibility separates these chips entirely: the 2400GE fits AMD Socket AM4, while the 980X requires Intel Socket 1366. Memory support differs fundamentally as well—the 2400GE uses dual-channel DDR4 with a memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s, whereas the 980X uses triple-channel DDR3 with no listed bandwidth figure. PCIe generations also differ, with the 2400GE supporting Gen 3 (8 CPU lanes) and the 980X limited to Gen 2.

The 2400GE includes Radeon RX Vega 11 integrated graphics, a feature the 980X lacks entirely. Production status also varies: the 2400GE remains listed as Active, while the 980X is End-of-life. Release dates show a significant generational gap, with the 980X launching in March 2010 and the 2400GE arriving in April 2018. The 2400GE carries part number YD2400C6M4MFBYD2400C6FBMPK, while the 980X uses SLBUZ.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these processors is vast. The Ryzen 5 2400GE is built on AMD's Zen architecture with the Raven Ridge codename, manufactured on a 14nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 4,950 million transistors into a 210 mm² die. The Core i7-980X uses Intel's Westmere architecture with the Gulftown codename, fabricated on a 32nm process at Intel, containing just 1,170 million transistors across a 239 mm² die. The 14nm process gives the 2400GE a transistor density advantage that partially explains its performance efficiency.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The 2400GE provides 128 KB of L1 cache per core and 512 KB of L2 cache per core, plus 4 MB of shared L3 cache. The 980X offers 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, but compensates with a much larger 12 MB shared L3 cache. This threefold L3 advantage for Intel could benefit certain workloads, though benchmark data does not show it translating into wins.

The 2400GE's memory controller supports DDR4 in a dual-channel configuration with 46.9 GB/s bandwidth, while the 980X's controller uses DDR3 in a triple-channel setup. The 2400GE also features a newer PCIe implementation—Gen 3 with 8 CPU lanes—versus the 980X's Gen 2. Both processors have unlocked multipliers, but the 2400GE's 35W TDP suggests far more headroom for cooling and power delivery in compact systems. The 980X's 130W TDP reflects its older, less efficient process node and higher core count. Neither processor supports ECC memory, according to the specification data.