AMD Ryzen 5 7400 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400 and Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus occupy different tiers of the desktop processor market, despite both being current-generation offerings. The Ryzen 5 7400 is a 6-core part built on the Zen 4 architecture, while the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is an 18-core processor using Intel's Arrow Lake Refresh design. Benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap between them, with the Intel processor winning all 11 head-to-head comparisons in the database. The recorded scores place the Ryzen 5 7400 at the 88th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus sits at the 93rd percentile, indicating that both are above-average performers but the Intel chip operates in a higher performance bracket.

Where Each One Wins

The head-to-head benchmark results are unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus wins every recorded test, leaving the AMD Ryzen 5 7400 without a single victory. This does not mean the Ryzen 5 7400 lacks merit, but its strengths are relative to other processors in its class rather than against this specific Intel counterpart. The Ryzen 5 7400's average benchmark score of 42055 places it within 0.7% of the Intel Core i9-12900K, which scores 42335, showing that it competes effectively with older high-end desktop parts. Its single-thread score of 3248 and multithread score of 21712 suggest a balanced design suited for everyday desktop workloads and light productivity tasks.

The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus, by contrast, delivers performance that rivals much more expensive processors. Its average score of 66159 is nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D at 65914, a delta of just 0.4%, and it sits within 1% of the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus at 66855. The Intel chip's wins in floating-point math, data compression, and prime number finding indicate particular strength in scientific computing and data-heavy workloads. The Ryzen 5 7400's best showing comes in single-thread performance, where it trails by 30.9%, the smallest margin in the entire benchmark suite. This suggests that for lightly threaded applications, the AMD processor is relatively closer to the Intel part than in any other category, though still behind.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 5 7400 uses the Zen 4 architecture with the Raphael codename, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC with 6,570 million transistors on a 71 mm² die. It features 6 cores and 12 threads, relying on simultaneous multithreading to double its thread count. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus uses the Arrow Lake Refresh codename with a 3 nm process at TSMC, packing 17,800 million transistors across a 243 mm² die. It has 18 cores and 18 threads, meaning it does not use multithreading at all, instead relying on a higher physical core count to achieve its thread throughput.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially between the two. The Ryzen 5 7400 allocates 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. This gives the Intel processor significantly more aggregate cache, which helps explain its dominance in data compression and random string sorting tests. The process node advantage also matters: the 3 nm process allows the Intel chip to fit more than twice the transistor count into roughly 3.4 times the die area, enabling its higher core count.

Memory bandwidth also favors Intel, with the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus supporting 115.2 GB/s compared to the Ryzen 5 7400's 83.2 GB/s. Both support DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, and both support ECC memory. The AMD processor includes integrated Radeon Graphics, while the Intel part has no integrated graphics, which is indicated by the "KF" suffix in its name. Both processors have unlocked multipliers, but they use different sockets: the Ryzen 5 7400 fits AMD Socket AM5, while the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus uses Intel Socket 1851. PCIe support also differs, with AMD providing Gen 5 across 24 lanes and Intel providing Gen 5 across 20 lanes.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-thread benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 4698 in the passmark single-thread test, compared to 3248 for the AMD Ryzen 5 7400. This represents a 30.9% advantage for Intel in lightly threaded workloads.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare between the two processors?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has an average benchmark score of 66159, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7400 averages 42055. The Intel processor's nearest rival is the Intel Core 9 273PQE at 66099, while the AMD processor sits close to the Intel Core i7-14700T at 41914.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7400 has 6 cores and 12 threads, using simultaneous multithreading. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads, with no multithreading support.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen 5 7400 and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus support ECC memory. Both also use DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration.

Q: Which processor has a higher clock speed?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. The AMD Ryzen 5 7400 has a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz.

Q: What is the production status of each processor?

A: Both the AMD Ryzen 5 7400 and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus have an active production status. The AMD processor was released in September 2025, while the Intel processor was released in March 2026.

Specification Differences

The specification tables show clear divergences. The AMD Ryzen 5 7400 uses the 7000 series branding with a Zen 4 architecture, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 with an Arrow Lake Refresh codename. Process nodes differ, with AMD using 5 nm and Intel using 3 nm, both fabricated by TSMC. The transistor count is 6,570 million for AMD versus 17,800 million for Intel, and the die size is 71 mm² for AMD versus 243 mm² for Intel.

Core and thread counts are a major differentiator: 6 cores and 12 threads for the AMD part, versus 18 cores and 18 threads for the Intel part. Clock speeds favor Intel, with a base clock of 4.20 GHz and boost clock of 5.30 GHz, compared to 3.30 GHz and 4.30 GHz for AMD. The thermal design power is 65 watts for the AMD processor and 125 watts for the Intel processor. Cache configurations differ at every level: L1 cache is 64 KB per core for AMD and 192 KB per core for Intel, L2 cache is 1 MB per core for AMD and 3 MB per core for Intel, and L3 cache is 16 MB shared for AMD and 30 MB shared for Intel.

Memory bandwidth shows Intel ahead at 115.2 GB/s versus AMD's 83.2 GB/s. Both support DDR5 and dual-channel memory, and both support ECC. PCIe lane counts differ, with AMD offering 24 lanes and Intel offering 20 lanes, both at Gen 5. The AMD processor includes integrated Radeon Graphics, while the Intel processor has no integrated graphics. Sockets are incompatible: AMD uses Socket AM5 and Intel uses Socket 1851. Both processors have unlocked multipliers, and both have an active production status. The Intel processor has a launch MSRP of $184, while the AMD processor has no listed launch MSRP in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a consistent pattern of Intel dominance across all test categories. The largest margin comes in the passmark find prime numbers test, where the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 452 against the AMD Ryzen 5 7400's 79, a delta of 82.5% in Intel's favor. This test heavily rewards raw integer throughput and cache efficiency, both of which favor the Intel part's higher core count and larger caches. Similarly, the floating-point math test shows Intel at 159824 versus AMD at 40784, a 74.5% advantage, indicating substantial superiority in scientific and engineering calculations.

The data compression test shows Intel at 553155 versus AMD at 261749, a 52.7% delta, while random string sorting shows Intel at 67209 versus AMD at 31110, a 53.7% delta. These results align with the Intel processor's larger L3 cache and higher memory bandwidth. The multithread test shows Intel at 50146 versus AMD at 21712, a 56.7% margin, reflecting the 18-core versus 6-core configuration. Data encryption shows Intel at 41292 versus AMD at 14865, a 64% delta, and extended instructions show Intel at 42880 versus AMD at 19924, a 53.5% delta.

The physics test reveals a 63.9% delta, with Intel scoring 3183 and AMD scoring 1150. Integer math shows Intel at 123030 versus AMD at 64733, a 47.4% delta, which is the smallest margin among the multithreaded tests. The single-thread test, recorded twice in the database with identical scores, shows the narrowest gap: Intel at 4698 versus AMD at 3248, a 30.9% delta. This indicates that while Intel wins every category, its per-core advantage is less pronounced than its aggregate throughput advantage. The AMD processor's single-thread score of 3248 places it in a competitive range with older high-end desktop parts, but the Intel processor's 4698 score moves it into a different performance class entirely.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is the superior processor in every measured benchmark category. Its 11-0 head-to-head record, combined with a 93rd percentile ranking versus the AMD processor's 88th percentile, makes the performance hierarchy clear. The Intel processor delivers 30.9% higher single-thread performance and 56.7% higher multithread performance, with even larger margins in specialized workloads like prime number finding and floating-point math. Its average benchmark score of 66159 places it alongside the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D, which scores 65914, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7400's average of 42055 aligns it with the Intel Core i7-14700T at 41914.

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400 does maintain relevance for specific use cases. Its 65-watt thermal design power makes it a lower-power option compared to the Intel processor's 125 watts. Its integrated Radeon Graphics provides display output capability without a discrete GPU, which the Intel part lacks entirely. The AMD processor's compatibility with Socket AM5 and its smaller die size suggest a more modest platform footprint. However, the benchmark data does not show any workload category where the AMD processor comes out ahead, so its appeal rests on platform characteristics rather than raw performance.

Users requiring maximum compute throughput, particularly for data compression, encryption, or floating-point workloads, should look toward the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus. Users prioritizing lower power consumption or needing integrated graphics should consider the AMD Ryzen 5 7400, understanding that it trails in every recorded benchmark. The Intel processor's launch MSRP of $184, stated once here for reference, positions it as a high-core-count desktop part, while the AMD processor has no listed launch MSRP in the database. The performance gap is substantial, and the recorded data does not suggest any scenario where the AMD processor closes the divide.