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

  • #11
    Originally posted by luno View Post
    power draw and heat sucks in Intel
    Were there any temperature measurements, I remember both manufacturers are running between 90 and 100 °C lately? When Intel is not getting out of hand with factory overclocking, their CPUs are not that bad, basically on gen behind AMD. For this particular CPU the only downside is that you have no upgrade path. With AMD you can upgrade to Zen 6 and maybe 7 later.

    Comment


    • #12
      I would have liked to see you test their igpus on the gaming benchmarks rather than using a dgpu.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by rabcor View Post
        I would have liked to see you test their igpus on the gaming benchmarks rather than using a dgpu.
        The "F" parts don't have working iGPUs so they get fused off. Die harvesting to salvage otherwise good CPUs.

        Comment


        • #14
          benchmarks like this clearly show to me that intel lost the chip war...
          the amd chip is cheaper burn less energy in average has higher performance
          and what people do not unterstand is that more cores is plain and simple bad because the more cores you have the more complex the software becomes and the overhead of this complex software is punishing you.

          i think technically something like the Qualcomm Elite X is the best it was 12 cores and 12 threats the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F also has 12 threats means from the software point of view its the same complexity but of course the Qualcomm Elite X is much much much faster.

          its the absence of hyperthreating what makes the Qualcomm Elite X so good and so fast.., AMD and Intel can only deliver performance with hyperthreating the Qualcomm Elite X does the same with their 8-wide decoder. and amd/intel chips are only 4/6 wide in their decoder.

          this all shows its game over for intel... the single-threat performance of a Qualcomm Elite X outperforms nearly every intel cpu they ever produced means even 15000€ xeon chips lose who have 1000watt TDP...

          same effect as Apple M4 chips have their singlecore performance is so high that it is game over for intel...

          all these winners AMD/APPLE/QUAlCOMM they are all on 3/4nm TSMC and intels 10nm is garbage.

          its really sad that qualcomm only produce notebook chips because hell the Qualcomm Elite X beats the shit out of my Threatripper 1920X and this cpu has 250watt TDP... and the qualcomm elite X chip has 56watt TDP...
          Phantom circuit Sequence Reducer Dyslexia

          Comment


          • #15
            The performance (sans-AVX 512) is closer than I thought, and the 8400f is, as expected, more efficent. But nothing will make up for the sorry I/O offered by that jumped-up laptop chip.

            I can see a reason why someone might purchase the APU versions for a desktop system, but without the integrated graphics, I believe one should purchase an R5 7500f or 7600 for similar money any day of the week.

            Comment


            • #16
              The price of admission to AM5 with the cheaper R5 processor makes more sense. I did the same thing with a 3600 to get on AM4 and waited for the 5800X. Was a very good strategy. No desire to upgrade from the 5800X anytime soon. The 5800X is right now like the i7 2600K back in the day.

              Comment

              Working...
              X