AMD Ryzen 5 8400F vs Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-84-100 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database contains a complete set of measurements for the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F, while the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-84-100 currently has no recorded benchmark scores. This asymmetry shapes the entire comparison: the data provides a full performance profile for the AMD part, and the Qualcomm part must be evaluated on its specifications alone.

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F delivers strong multi-threaded results across several test suites. In Cinebench R23 multicore, it scores 20,851 points, while the single-core test yields 2,943 points. The Cinebench R20 multicore result is 8,757 points with a single-core score of 1,236. In the older Cinebench R15 suite, the multicore score is 2,101 and single-core is 296. These results place the processor in the 77th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 25,005.

The 3DMark suite shows scaling from 951 points in single-thread to 6,165 points in max-threads. The intermediate results are 1,874 for 2 threads, 3,563 for 4 threads, and 5,275 for 8 threads. The 16-thread test scores 6,091, which is slightly below the max-threads result, indicating the processor reaches near-full utilization with 12 threads and gains little additional performance beyond that point.

PassMark tests reveal specific workload characteristics. The multithread score is 24,389, and single-thread is 3,685. Integer math scores 74,021, floating-point math scores 46,217, and extended instructions score 22,175. Data compression achieves 288,158, while data encryption reaches 16,646. Random string sorting scores 34,604, find prime numbers scores 89, and physics scores 1,332.

The nearest rivals in the database provide context for these numbers. The AMD Ryzen 5 7500F has an average score of 24,964, which is 0.2% below the 8400F. The Intel Core i7-11850H scores 24,935, or 0.3% lower. The Intel Core i7-13620H scores 24,911, or 0.4% lower. On the higher side, the AMD EPYC 9474F scores 25,103, which is 0.4% above the 8400F. These deltas are small, showing the 8400F sits in a tightly clustered performance band.

Since the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-84-100 has no benchmark scores, no head-to-head measurement comparisons can be made. The data records zero wins for each processor in direct benchmark matchups. The analysis must therefore rely on architectural and specification differences to characterize the two parts.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear conclusion: the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F is the only one of the two processors with measured performance results. Its average benchmark score of 25,005 and 77th percentile ranking provide concrete evidence of its capabilities. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-84-100 has an average benchmark score of 0 and sits at the 50th percentile, which reflects the absence of recorded data rather than a measured performance level.

For users choosing between these two, the AMD processor offers verified multi-threaded and single-threaded performance across Cinebench, 3DMark, and PassMark suites. The Qualcomm processor lacks any recorded measurements, so its performance cannot be confirmed from the database. The AMD part also has a recorded launch MSRP of $170, while the Qualcomm part has no launch MSRP in the data.

The Qualcomm processor targets the mobile segment with a 35 W TDP and 12 cores, whereas the AMD processor is a desktop part with a 65 W TDP and 6 cores. These are fundamentally different market positions. The database shows the AMD part is active in production and has an unlocked multiplier, while the Qualcomm part is also active but has a locked multiplier. The choice depends on whether the user needs a desktop processor with confirmed benchmark data or a mobile processor whose performance remains unmeasured in the database.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F uses the Zen 4 architecture under the codename Phoenix, belonging to the 8000 series and the Ryzen 5 generation. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-84-100 uses the Oryon codename under the Snapdragon X Elite generation. Both processors are manufactured on a 4 nm process node at TSMC, so the fabrication technology is identical.

The cache structures differ substantially. The AMD processor has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Qualcomm processor has 288 KB of L1 cache per core, 12 MB of L2 cache per module, and only 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger L1 allocation per core on the Qualcomm side is notable, but the AMD part provides more shared L3 cache.

The AMD processor integrates no graphics, while the Qualcomm processor includes an Adreno X1-85 integrated GPU. This makes the Qualcomm part a complete system-on-chip solution, whereas the AMD part requires a discrete graphics card for display output. The AMD processor is designed for desktop systems with a separate GPU, while the Qualcomm processor targets mobile devices with integrated graphics.

The AMD processor has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking, while the Qualcomm processor has a locked multiplier. The AMD part uses the AMD Socket AM5, and the Qualcomm part uses the Qualcomm BGA 2073 socket. The AMD processor has a part number of 100-000001591, and the Qualcomm processor has a part number of X1E84100.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts differ: the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-84-100 has 12 cores and 12 threads. The Qualcomm part has twice the core count but no simultaneous multithreading, so its thread count equals its core count. The AMD part uses multithreading to double its thread count from 6 to 12.

Clock speeds differ. The AMD processor has a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The Qualcomm processor has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.20 GHz. The AMD part runs at higher clocks in both base and boost operation.

Power consumption differs significantly. The AMD processor has a TDP of 65 W, while the Qualcomm processor has a TDP of 35 W. The Qualcomm part uses nearly half the power budget, consistent with its mobile market segment.

Memory support differs. The AMD processor supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus and 83.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Qualcomm processor supports LPDDR5X memory with a dual-channel bus and 135.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Qualcomm part offers higher memory bandwidth despite its lower TDP.

PCIe support differs. The AMD processor provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the Qualcomm processor provides Gen 4 with 12 lanes (CPU only). The AMD part offers more PCIe lanes for expansion.

The AMD processor has a die size of 178 mm² and 25,000 million transistors, while the Qualcomm processor has no recorded die size or transistor count in the database. The AMD processor was released on 2024-03-31, and the Qualcomm processor was released on 2024-04-23, about three weeks later.

FAQ

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F have integrated graphics?

A: No. The database records integrated graphics as N/A for the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-84-100 includes an Adreno X1-85 integrated GPU.

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-84-100 has 12 cores, while the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has 6 cores. However, the AMD processor has 12 threads due to multithreading, matching the Qualcomm processor's thread count.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has 83.2 GB/s memory bandwidth with DDR5 support. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-84-100 has 135.2 GB/s memory bandwidth with LPDDR5X support. The Qualcomm part provides 52 GB/s more bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-84-100 has a boost clock of 4.20 GHz. The AMD processor runs 0.50 GHz higher at boost.

Q: What is the TDP of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F has a TDP of 65 W. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-84-100 has a TDP of 35 W. The Qualcomm processor uses 30 W less power.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F have benchmark scores?

A: Yes. The database contains 23 benchmark scores for the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F, including Cinebench R23 multicore at 20,851 and PassMark multithread at 24,389. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-84-100 has no recorded benchmark scores.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F wins in every measured benchmark category because it is the only processor with recorded data. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 20,851 and single-core score of 2,943 demonstrate balanced performance across both multi-threaded and single-threaded workloads. The 3DMark results show consistent scaling from 951 single-thread to 6,165 max-threads. The PassMark suite confirms strong integer math at 74,021 and floating-point math at 46,217.

The AMD processor also wins on clock speed, with a 4.70 GHz boost clock versus 4.20 GHz for the Qualcomm part. It provides more PCIe lanes at 20 versus 12, and it has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. Its launch MSRP is recorded as $170, while the Qualcomm part has no listed launch MSRP.

The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-84-100 wins on specifications that favor mobile deployment. Its 35 W TDP is nearly half the AMD processor's 65 W, making it more suitable for battery-powered devices. Its 12 cores double the AMD processor's core count, and its 135.2 GB/s memory bandwidth exceeds the AMD part's 83.2 GB/s. The integrated Adreno X1-85 GPU eliminates the need for a separate graphics card.

The cache profile favors the Qualcomm part for per-core L1 capacity at 288 KB per core versus 64 KB per core, and the L2 cache is organized as 12 MB per module. The AMD part has a larger shared L3 cache at 16 MB versus 6 MB. The Qualcomm part's higher memory bandwidth and lower power draw make it the data-supported choice for mobile systems, while the AMD part's verified benchmark scores make it the choice for desktop workloads where measured performance is required.

The market segments differ: the AMD processor is a desktop part, and the Qualcomm processor is a mobile part. The database shows the AMD processor in the 77th percentile versus the 50th percentile for the Qualcomm part, though the latter reflects missing data rather than measured performance. Users needing confirmed performance numbers should select the AMD processor; users prioritizing power efficiency and core count in a mobile form factor should consider the Qualcomm processor based on its specification advantages.