Review Intel Core i5-14400 review: Intel's value gaming chip falls behind AMD

[Admin]

We put Intel's Core i5-14400 through a battery of gaming and productivity benchmarks to see how it fares against competing AMD Ryzen processors.

Intel Core i5-14400 review: Intel's value gaming chip falls behind AMD : Read more

 

[-Fran-]

Snake oil? Le gasp!

In any case, I have to say I'm surprised the perf/$ kind of sucks with this chip (not suck, but not beat AMD as it was the case). This was the last bastion for Intel to claim "superiority" from recent memory, so it's surprising.

Thanks for the review and great data, Paul!

Regards.

 

[usertests]

I didn't realize the 7600X was that far behind the 5000X3D CPUs.

Seems the gap is wider than this review:
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-9-7950x-ryzen-5-7600x-cpu-review/6

 

[edzieba]

Particular for DIY upgraders, the DDR4 aspect for Raptor Lake still likely makes it more attractive in total upgrade (CPU + mobo + RAM) perf/$. Even with DDR5 getting less expensive, it will still be more expensive than paying nothing to re-use your current DDR4 DIMMs.

 

[TerryLaze]

Snake oil? Le gasp!

In any case, I have to say I'm surprised the perf/$ kind of sucks with this chip (not suck, but not beat AMD as it was the case). This was the last bastion for Intel to claim "superiority" from recent memory, so it's surprising.

Thanks for the review and great data, Paul!

Regards.

I'm just wondering, but what exactly is surprising about a company having to sell older technology for less money, or newer for more, anyway you take it.

The 7600x was $300 when it came out...and now AMD is forced to sell it for 70% of that because of the x3d CPUs and the newer intel CPUs, even though it is current gen.

 

[Glutonias Hambonias]

Maybe Ryzen will start to pull ahead.

 

[rluker5]

The 14th series pricing is not the best compared to older named products. You can buy the same chip, but faster, unlocked and at 2/3 the price at Newegg right now: the 12600kf https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i5-12600kf-core-i5-12th-gen/p/N82E16819118349

It would probably beat the 7600x(at $210) for $155. A real world performance/price thrashing. Although you would have to buy a $20 cooler if you didn't already have one: https://www.amazon.com/Thermalright...673&sprefix=lga+1700+coo,aps,104&sr=8-20&th=1

 

[Roland Of Gilead]

The base and boost clocks for the 14400/13400 are reversed in the first table.

 

[strobolt]

I don't quite understand why the article mentions "adequate stock cooler" as a pro but then also within the article it's mentioned that "we always recommend upgrading the stock cooler". If the stock cooler is adequate then what's the reason for upgrading? I understand that some people who run very extensive multithreaded workloads and in warmer climate you might end up with excessive noise and even bottlenecking but the average gamer / productivity user in a airconditioned environment probably doesn't even notice the difference. And even in gaming when you want to run high fps, the GPU is likely going to make so much noise that the CPU cooler is not distinguishable anyway.

 

[-Fran-]

I'm just wondering, but what exactly is surprising about a company having to sell older technology for less money, or newer for more, anyway you take it.

The 7600x was $300 when it came out...and now AMD is forced to sell it for 70% of that because of the x3d CPUs and the newer intel CPUs, even though it is current gen.

Saying the i5 14400 is "new" is a big stretch given is a toss between being a re-hashed Alder or a defective Raptor.

As for the price: Intel decided that price point, so they have only themselves to blame. I believe Intel thinks they can get away with people not doing their research (much like AMD does as well; 5700 non-G, looking at you) only looking at the price point relative to the rest.

That's what is surprising to me: why didn't Intel read the room and chose such a price point that would make them look bad. Weird. Are they with no other options anymore?

Regards.

 

[Amdlova]

You can grab a used 13500t on ebay for 175us. Cheap gaming little machine.

 

[salgado18]

I believe Intel thinks they can get away with people not doing their research

I believe that's Intel mindset for a very, very long time (and they are not that wrong).

 

[TerryLaze]

Saying the i5 14400 is "new" is a big stretch given is a toss between being a re-hashed Alder or a defective Raptor.

That's all it takes for them to sell a new gen.
It's still better than no change at all, it's what allows them to have high prices while AMD is forced to reduce prices.

That's what is surprising to me: why didn't Intel read the room and chose such a price point that would make them look bad. Weird. Are they with no other options anymore?

Regards.

Sure they have other options, they could be doing the same thing that AMD does, not release anything new and not make any money at all because they have to reduce prices down to cost or very near to it.
They prefer to make minimal work and get paid for it, same as anybody.

 

[artk2219]

One of the questions rolling through my mind is, how long will AMD keep making AM4 X3D cpu's. It's not the cheapest thing to pump out, but at the same time they've got the process down pat, and they just released new binned models. Im wondering if those X3D's will end up being some of the most produced AM4 cpu's. Technically they haven't stopped producing most of their zen architectures, they've just rename them and tossed them into a different product line.

https://community.amd.com/t5/corpor...umbers-for-2023-mobile-processors/ba-p/543985

 

[dtemple]

I don't quite understand why the article mentions "adequate stock cooler" as a pro but then also within the article it's mentioned that "we always recommend upgrading the stock cooler". If the stock cooler is adequate then what's the reason for upgrading? I understand that some people who run very extensive multithreaded workloads and in warmer climate you might end up with excessive noise and even bottlenecking but the average gamer / productivity user in a airconditioned environment probably doesn't even notice the difference. And even in gaming when you want to run high fps, the GPU is likely going to make so much noise that the CPU cooler is not distinguishable anyway.

I suppose that's the difference between "adequate" and "recommended." It's well established at this point that newer Intel CPUs' performance is determined by how long they can sustain boost clocks, and many motherboards' default BIOS settings exceed the Intel recommendations for boost clock sustained time. Then the only limiting factor would be temperature, and thermal throttling certainly could become a factor. A Thermalright Assassin X 120R SE is under $20 shipped on Amazon, and would be a marked improvement over Intel's Laminar cooler. There are people who would buy the i5-14400 for their home office to have a snappy machine - those folks can get away with the stock cooler for sure. Then, there are people who would use the i5-14400 for gaming, and they'd be well served by an $18 upgraded 120mm tower cooler.

 

[dtemple]

The 14th series pricing is not the best compared to older named products. You can buy the same chip, but faster, unlocked and at 2/3 the price at Newegg right now: the 12600kf https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i5-12600kf-core-i5-12th-gen/p/N82E16819118349

It would probably beat the 7600x(at $210) for $155. A real world performance/price thrashing. Although you would have to buy a $20 cooler if you didn't already have one: https://www.amazon.com/Thermalright-Assassin-SE-Heatpipes-TL-C12C/dp/B09Y869Z8B/ref=sr_1_20?crid=2SX1Y3LFI5SQZ&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.oWn8-RfUPfvuDzeOWU8_36bSlzc8uRnTjORmhoO2C0vsUFZ2STUVF1WtAEnZKG4Z-zUmrifpulpSJuMlZsGSFeEKCMLhJtaGVL11yTUskSdNXF1vBh_BKnhNbXbFp3tXCfLhF5edknjQiEoY5HyH03kxieOlLxKUutlOXeloABhP1HFS0d8K3bcCwNERJBSq830llUJSSoS_NVuNQxFQtR_-9MBwMGiEx6rd9EcgLtA.GH6nMT41xmldgof1e-hTaPzaY_pNrkZhB5XDJ4IX1Mo&dib_tag=se&keywords=lga+1700+cooler&qid=1713446673&sprefix=lga+1700+coo,aps,104&sr=8-20&th=1

If we're going purely for price-to-performance, I'd argue you can go one step farther down the stack with an i5-12400F which can regularly be found on a particular Amazon-run overstock site for $99. With a $20 cooler, and some kind of motherboard with halfway decent VRM cooling, you're off to the races.

 

[Co BIY]

As for the price: Intel decided that price point, so they have only themselves to blame. I believe Intel thinks they can get away with people not doing their research (much like AMD does as well; 5700 non-G, looking at you) only looking at the price point relative to the rest.

That's what is surprising to me: why didn't Intel read the room and chose such a price point that would make them look bad. Weird. Are they with no other options anymore?

I think this processor is targeted at OEMs that will buy in 1000 pcs trays at a discount. The MSRP is set so those discounts look good and create value for the assemblers.

 

[rluker5]

If we're going purely for price-to-performance, I'd argue you can go one step farther down the stack with an i5-12400F which can regularly be found on a particular Amazon-run overstock site for $99. With a $20 cooler, and some kind of motherboard with halfway decent VRM cooling, you're off to the races.

Don't tempt me

 

[Avro Arrow]

For new builds, the only platform that anyone should be looking at is AM5. Both AM4 and LGA1700 are dead-ends and are just bad values no matter how you look at it unless you're upgrading from a previous CPU. Even then, the performance "uplift" (if you want to call it that) of the Intel CPUs is nothing worth writing home about.

 

[Avro Arrow]

I don't quite understand why the article mentions "adequate stock cooler" as a pro but then also within the article it's mentioned that "we always recommend upgrading the stock cooler". If the stock cooler is adequate then what's the reason for upgrading? I understand that some people who run very extensive multithreaded workloads and in warmer climate you might end up with excessive noise and even bottlenecking but the average gamer / productivity user in a airconditioned environment probably doesn't even notice the difference. And even in gaming when you want to run high fps, the GPU is likely going to make so much noise that the CPU cooler is not distinguishable anyway.

I agree 100%! Here I am running an R7-5800X3D with an RX 7900 XTX and doing just fine with a Wraith Prism that cost me literally nothing. It makes me shake my head when I see people spending 3 figures on a fancy AIO which does nothing to improve their performance but introduces the risk of breaking down or leaking.

 

[cyrusfox]

Strongly disagree here

For new builds, the only platform that anyone should be looking at is AM5. Both AM4 and LGA1700 are dead-ends and are just bad values no matter how you look at it unless you're upgrading from a previous CPU. Even then, the performance "uplift" (if you want to call it that) of the Intel CPUs is nothing worth writing home about.

For the vast majority of users, a 12th-14th gen at a great price point would be an excellent build(Same for AM4 build). Just because the platform is "dead end" is of little value importance to the majority. I Personally ran a Ivy bridge from 2012 till 2019 until I upgraded to a 9900KF(Grateful I skipped8th gen...). I went through many GPUs but the platform was more than serviceable and still is living on as a plex server out in the wild.

The biggest upgrades in the future are going to be a better GPU and perhaps an add in AI NPU to add TOPS if AI actually does become a "killer feature" rather than an intrusive annoyance. CPU and DRAM speeds are well passed diminishing returns in terms of ROI in performance uplift for your dollar. This deadend logic for CPU upgrade on a mobo is makes no little sense in practice. 8-16 Cores is more than capable for the long haul. If you need better encoding, get a hardware dedicated encoder. If you need TOPs, grab an accelerator[GPU or dedicated]. These platforms come with PCIe gen 4 or 5, might wish for more lanes in the future, but I'd wager that CPU is not going to ever be your bottleneck(and if it is, you should like use dedicated silicon for that task [accelerator].

As many have already pointed out, you are not limited to 14th gen, 12 + 13 offer great value and on the used market you have many better options than the 14400 as well as on the AMD side. I'm sitting on a 13900 and doing my best to not waste a hundred quid to side upgrade to a zero uplift 14900(Hey but I would get APO??? would love an update on that). Arrowlake or whatever is coming next for the desktop can't come out soon enough. I'll also grab a discounted Arc if it ever comes down to bargain prices, battlemage might do the trick

 

[Thunder64]

Strongly disagree here

For the vast majority of users, a 12th-14th gen at a great price point would be an excellent build(Same for AM4 build). Just because the platform is "dead end" is of little value importance to the majority. I Personally ran a Ivy bridge from 2012 till 2019 until I upgraded to a 9900KF(Grateful I skipped8th gen...). I went through many GPUs but the platform was more than serviceable and still is living on as a plex server out in the wild.

The biggest upgrades in the future are going to be a better GPU and perhaps an add in AI NPU to add TOPS if AI actually does become a "killer feature" rather than an intrusive annoyance. CPU and DRAM speeds are well passed diminishing returns in terms of ROI in performance uplift for your dollar. This deadend logic for CPU upgrade on a mobo is makes no little sense in practice. 8-16 Cores is more than capable for the long haul. If you need better encoding, get a hardware dedicated encoder. If you need TOPs, grab an accelerator[GPU or dedicated]. These platforms come with PCIe gen 4 or 5, might wish for more lanes in the future, but I'd wager that CPU is not going to ever be your bottleneck(and if it is, you should like use dedicated silicon for that task [accelerator].

As many have already pointed out, you are not limited to 14th gen, 12 + 13 offer great value and on the used market you have many better options than the 14400 as well as on the AMD side. I'm sitting on a 13900 and doing my best to not waste a hundred quid to side upgrade to a zero uplift 14900(Hey but I would get APO??? would love an update on that). Arrowlake or whatever is coming next for the desktop can't come out soon enough. I'll also grab a discounted Arc if it ever comes down to bargain prices, battlemage might do the trick

As someone who bought into a B450 and 2600X and 16GB 3200MT/s memory I disagree. I swapped the CPU for a 5700X and 32GB of 3600MT/s memory. Added years to its life.

Buying into a dead end platform today would be monumentally shortsighted.

 

[Alvar "Miles" Udell]

Cons​

• - Pricing relative to AMD Ryzen

At MSRP it's $300 for the 7600X and $250 for the 14400 (Newegg's listed MSRP prices), and for the same performance it would be an easy Intel win. At the current sale prices, $235 for the 14400 and $209 for the 7600X (again Newegg current deal prices) it's an AMD win. That shouldn't be a con, listed MSRP is 17% less expensive.

 

[TerryLaze]

I'm sitting on a 13900 and doing my best to not waste a hundred quid to side upgrade to a zero uplift 14900(Hey but I would get APO??? would love an update on that).

APO got updated to include all hybrid CPUs from 12th gen up, you do need a bios update that will unlock all the CPUs and the newest version of dynamic tuning tech installed.

 

[Amdlova]

Am4 and lga1700 it's money wise decision...
That asrock h670 pg ripitide I have. Has the better pci layout,ssd nvme configuration with lowest money ever. Only 105us for pci 5 x16 3 nvme pci 4.0 and another pci 4x. Can make a raid 0 with 22110 nvme to break the chipset in half

Amd am5 boards are stupid over priced and becomes good over 200us or more

Trying all 35w cpu on this board finding the better clock/power. And it's a dead platform .

When they launch the ps6 xbox one LGBT edition... maybe I think upgrade something.