Ryzen 5 7540U vs i5-9400F

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i5-9400F
2019
6 cores / 6 threads, 65 Watt
6.07
Ryzen 5 7540U
2023
6 cores / 12 threads, 28 Watt
11.99
+97.5%

Ryzen 5 7540U outperforms Core i5-9400F by an impressive 98% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i5-9400F and Ryzen 5 7540U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1094654
Place by popularity25not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.11no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesIntel Core i5AMD Phoenix (Zen 4, Ryzen 7040)
Power efficiency8.6739.77
Architecture codenameCoffee Lake-R (2018−2019)Phoenix (Zen4) (2023)
Release date7 January 2019 (5 years ago)3 May 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$182no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Core i5-9400F and Ryzen 5 7540U basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores6 (Hexa-Core)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads612
Base clock speed2.9 GHz3.2 GHz
Boost clock speed4.1 GHz4.9 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier29no data
L1 cache385 KB64 KB (per core)
L2 cache1.5 MB1 MB (per core)
L3 cache9 MB (shared)16 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm4 nm
Die size149 mm2178 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data25,000 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++

Compatibility

Information on Core i5-9400F and Ryzen 5 7540U compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketFCLGA1151FP7
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt28 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i5-9400F and Ryzen 5 7540U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2no data
AES-NI++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Core i5-9400F and Ryzen 5 7540U technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data
Secure Key+no data
MPX+-
Identity Protection+-
SGXYes with Intel® MEno data
OS Guard+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i5-9400F and Ryzen 5 7540U are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i5-9400F and Ryzen 5 7540U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2666DDR5
Maximum memory size128 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth42.671 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon 740M

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i5-9400F and Ryzen 5 7540U.

PCIe version3.04.0
PCI Express lanes1620

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

i5-9400F 6.07
Ryzen 5 7540U 11.99
+97.5%

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

i5-9400F 9469
Ryzen 5 7540U 18696
+97.4%

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

i5-9400F 1403
Ryzen 5 7540U 2072
+47.7%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

i5-9400F 4897
Ryzen 5 7540U 7979
+62.9%

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

i5-9400F 6490
Ryzen 5 7540U 7365
+13.5%

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

i5-9400F 31523
+14%
Ryzen 5 7540U 27647

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

i5-9400F 11
Ryzen 5 7540U 19
+72.5%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

i5-9400F 984
Ryzen 5 7540U 1676
+70.3%

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

i5-9400F 173
Ryzen 5 7540U 264
+52.6%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

i5-9400F 1.95
Ryzen 5 7540U 3.22
+65.1%

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

i5-9400F 5.2
Ryzen 5 7540U 8.7
+67.3%

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

i5-9400F 64
Ryzen 5 7540U 76
+18%

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

i5-9400F 234
+3.4%
Ryzen 5 7540U 226

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

i5-9400F 5794
+9.9%
Ryzen 5 7540U 5273

Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core

i5-9400F 5715
Ryzen 5 7540U 8296
+45.2%

Blender(-)

i5-9400F 469
+13.4%
Ryzen 5 7540U 413

Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core

i5-9400F 1139
Ryzen 5 7540U 1866
+63.8%

7-Zip Single

i5-9400F 4678
Ryzen 5 7540U 6039
+29.1%

7-Zip

i5-9400F 25639
Ryzen 5 7540U 35368
+37.9%

WebXPRT 3

i5-9400F 211
Ryzen 5 7540U 286
+35.5%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.07 11.99
Recency 7 January 2019 3 May 2023
Threads 6 12
Chip lithography 14 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 28 Watt

Ryzen 5 7540U has a 97.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, 100% more threads, a 250% more advanced lithography process, and 132.1% lower power consumption.

The Ryzen 5 7540U is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i5-9400F in performance tests.

Note that Core i5-9400F is a desktop processor while Ryzen 5 7540U is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i5-9400F and Ryzen 5 7540U, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Core i5-9400F
Core i5-9400F
AMD Ryzen 5 7540U
Ryzen 5 7540U

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


4.9 56620 votes

Rate Core i5-9400F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 56 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 7540U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i5-9400F or Ryzen 5 7540U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.