Ryzen 5 8400F vs i7-3635QM
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 5 8400F outperforms Core i7-3635QM by a whopping 405% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core i7-3635QM and Ryzen 5 8400F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1640 | 457 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 64.44 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Core i7 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 6.37 | 22.26 |
| Architecture codename | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) | Phoenix (2023−2024) |
| Release date | 1 September 2012 (12 years ago) | 1 April 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $170 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Core i7-3635QM and Ryzen 5 8400F 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 cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 4.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.4 GHz | 4.7 GHz |
| Bus rate | 5 GT/s | no data |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 256K (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 6 MB (shared) | 16 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 4 nm |
| Die size | 160 mm2 | 178 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,480 million | 25,000 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Core i7-3635QM and Ryzen 5 8400F 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 configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | FCBGA1224 | AM5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-3635QM and Ryzen 5 8400F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® AVX | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| My WiFi | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 2.0 | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Flex Memory Access | + | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| FDI | + | no data |
| Fast Memory Access | + | no data |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Security technologies
Core i7-3635QM and Ryzen 5 8400F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
| Secure Key | + | no data |
| Identity Protection | + | - |
| Anti-Theft | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-3635QM and Ryzen 5 8400F 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 i7-3635QM and Ryzen 5 8400F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 32 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel HD Graphics 4000 | N/A |
| Quick Sync Video | + | - |
| Clear Video HD | + | no data |
| Graphics max frequency | 1.2 GHz | no data |
| InTru 3D | + | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Core i7-3635QM and Ryzen 5 8400F integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 3 | no data |
| eDP | + | no data |
| DisplayPort | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
| SDVO | + | no data |
| CRT | + | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-3635QM and Ryzen 5 8400F.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 20 |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.03 | 15.30 |
| Recency | 1 September 2012 | 1 April 2024 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 6 |
| Threads | 8 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 65 Watt |
i7-3635QM has 44.4% lower power consumption.
Ryzen 5 8400F, on the other hand, has a 405% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, 50% more physical cores and 50% more threads, and a 450% more advanced lithography process.
The Ryzen 5 8400F is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i7-3635QM in performance tests.
Be aware that Core i7-3635QM is a notebook processor while Ryzen 5 8400F is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-3635QM and Ryzen 5 8400F, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
