Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD Ryzen 5 8400F vs. Intel Core i5 14400F: 230+ Benchmarks For Sub-$200 CPU Performance

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • AMD Ryzen 5 8400F vs. Intel Core i5 14400F: 230+ Benchmarks For Sub-$200 CPU Performance

    Phoronix: AMD Ryzen 5 8400F vs. Intel Core i5 1440F: 230+ Benchmarks For Sub-$200 CPU Performance

    This week AMD announced the Ryzen 5 8400F and Ryzen 7 8700F processors as new Zen 4 budget CPU contenders lacking any integrated graphics. While part of the Ryzen 8000 series, the 8400F also lacks the Ryzen AI support found in the higher-end SKUs. The Ryzen 5 8400F offers 6 cores / 12 threads, a 4.2GHz base clock and 4.7GHz boost clock, and a 65 Watt TDP while retailing for $169~189 USD. Here are some initial benchmarks of the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F in putting it up against 230+ benchmarks under Linux while also monitoring the CPU power consumption and comparing it to Intel's closest contender as the Core i5 1440F that retails for just under $200.


  • #2
    They are quite close in performance, consumption, price.
    So it mostly depends on AVX-512 where the Ryzen wins.

    Comment


    • #3
      Very impressive for AMD, that can match (and beat) the performance of 10 core Intel with 6 cores. I would get the AMD. Thank you Michael!

      Comment


      • #4
        Michael

        Typo/inconsistent processor naming?

        article title:
        "i5-1400f" should be "i5-14400F" ?

        page 1"
        "Both the i5-3400F and i5-1400F are 10-core processors" should be "i5-13400F" and "i5-14400F"?

        Interesting test results. Great to see "budget" chips perform so well.


        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by JEBjames View Post
          Michael

          Typo/inconsistent processor naming?

          article title:
          "i5-1400f" should be "i5-14400F" ?

          page 1"
          "Both the i5-3400F and i5-1400F are 10-core processors" should be "i5-13400F" and "i5-14400F"?

          Interesting test results. Great to see "budget" chips perform so well.

          Thanks, yeah, long day and the Intel Core names getting so long... At least shorter now for MTL+ Thanks!
          Michael Larabel
          https://www.michaellarabel.com/

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Phoronos View Post
            They are quite close in performance, consumption, price.
            So it mostly depends on AVX-512 where the Ryzen wins.
            yeah i was surprised with how close they were until the end where the avx 512 supported stuff REALLY curbed stomp the 14400f. intel not adding avx 512 to the e-cores which caused them to disable it on the p cores that actually have support for it was a big mistake. with raptor lake they should have added it.

            that said, if i was on a budget i would still grab the 14400 for the igpu, quicksync, and i only really care about software compilation and gaming. avx 512 isn't that big of a concern for me.
            Last edited by fafreeman; 16 May 2024, 09:19 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Both of these processors are right in the price range that I normally budget for a CPU, namely under $200.

              I think I would go with the i5 14400F and pair it with a Arc A380 for $110 and throw in lots of ram.

              The 8400F doesn't seem to be a good buy, I would much rather get the 8600G for $200 and use the money I saved on a video card to buy double the ram.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by mrg666 View Post
                Very impressive for AMD, that can match (and beat) the performance of 10 core Intel with 6 cores. I would get the AMD. Thank you Michael!
                Well, it works out like you'd expect. Intel has more cores. AMD has better cores. The Intel part generally wins in multi-threaded tests. The AMD part generally wins in single-threaded tests. AMD slaughters Intel on any tests that use AVX-512. Between these two I'd probably pick the AMD part. I wouldn't be surprised at all by people flipping that for the non "F" SKUs with iGPUs though. There's a niche out there for features like Quick Sync.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Phoronos View Post
                  They are quite close in performance, consumption, price.
                  So it mostly depends on AVX-512 where the Ryzen wins.
                  power draw and heat sucks in Intel

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by pWe00Iri3e7Z9lHOX2Qx View Post

                    Well, it works out like you'd expect. Intel has more cores. AMD has better cores. The Intel part generally wins in multi-threaded tests. The AMD part generally wins in single-threaded tests. AMD slaughters Intel on any tests that use AVX-512. Between these two I'd probably pick the AMD part. I wouldn't be surprised at all by people flipping that for the non "F" SKUs with iGPUs though. There's a niche out there for features like Quick Sync.
                    I would be one of those choosing the G variant

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X