Rendering, Encoding and Compression
By and large, the Ryzen processors are better-suited for heavy rendering workloads due to their higher core counts and simultaneous multi-threading capabilities. They dominate our threaded tests, as a result.
Single-threaded workloads, regardless of their genre, are still best addressed with Intel CPUs. The Core i5-9400F demonstrates small improvements over its predecessor, but basically offers the bare minimum to count as an upgrade. We certainly wouldn't recommend this chip as an upgrade.
Encoding and Compression
Our threaded compression and decompression metrics work directly from system memory, removing storage throughput from the equation.
Like its predecessor, the Core i5-9400F falls to the bottom of our chart. This is due to a combination of relatively tame frequencies and six physical cores. In comparison, the Ryzen 5 2600X offers a tremendous amount of performance at its price point.
y-cruncher, a single- and multi-threaded program that computes pi, is a great benchmark for measuring the effect of AVX instructions. As per usual, Intel's architectures chew through these taxing workloads with ease. The Core i5 models even beat AMD's 8C/16T Ryzen 7 2700 in a testament to the effectiveness of Intel's AVX implementation.
The Core i5-9400F beats AMD's Ryzen 5 processors during the HandBrake x265 test, which is heavily optimized for AVX instructions. The x264 benchmark, which has a lighter distribution of AVX instructions, finds the Ryzen 5 2600X better able to leverage the advantage of its extra threads (not to mention its overclocking headroom).
MORE: Best CPUs
MORE: All CPUs Content