AMD Ryzen 3 8440U vs Intel Core Ultra 7 164U Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 164U and AMD Ryzen 3 8440U split the benchmark suite almost evenly, with Intel taking 9 wins and AMD taking 8. That near-tie hides a clear thematic split: Intel dominates in raw compute-heavy workloads, while AMD leads in memory-latency-sensitive and single-threaded tasks.

The Intel chip wins decisively in floating-point math (45.9% ahead), integer math (34.5% ahead), and prime-number finding (30.2% ahead). It also wins physics simulation (34% ahead), data encryption (10.3% ahead), and multithreaded PassMark (3.8% ahead). These are classic CPU-throughput metrics where more cores and Intel's hybrid layout pay off. The Core Ultra 7 has 12 cores and 14 threads versus the Ryzen 3's 4 cores and 8 threads, and that core advantage shows in compute-heavy PassMark subtests.

AMD's wins are concentrated in Cinebench multi-core and single-core scaling, plus memory-throughput-style tasks. The Ryzen 3 8440U wins Cinebench R23 multi-core by 19.5%, Cinebench R20 multi-core by 1.8%, and Cinebench R20 single-core by 1.9%. It also wins PassMark single-thread by 17.9%, data compression by 6.2%, random string sorting by 14.6%, and extended instructions by 28.4%. The single-thread and string-sorting wins point to AMD's Zen 4 architecture having a stronger per-core memory pipeline, while the extended instructions lead suggests better vectorized instruction efficiency.

For practical use, Intel is the pick for number crunching, scientific workloads, encryption, and physics-based simulations. AMD is the pick for everyday desktop responsiveness, compression utilities, and applications that rely on single-core burst performance. The Cinebench R23 multi-core result is the big outlier: AMD wins by 19.5%, even though Intel wins PassMark multithread by 3.8%. That split suggests the two suites stress different aspects of multi-threading, with Cinebench favoring AMD's more efficient Zen 4 cores under sustained load.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from fundamentally different design philosophies. Intel uses Meteor Lake on a 7 nm process from Intel, built around a hybrid core layout. The Core Ultra 7 164U has 12 cores and 14 threads, with the L1 cache listed as 112 KB per core, L2 at 2 MB per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. AMD uses Zen 4 on a 4 nm process from TSMC, with 4 cores and 8 threads, L1 at 64 KB per core, L2 at 1 MB per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. The transistor counts differ sharply: AMD's die packs 20,900 million transistors across 137 mm², while Intel's transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database.

Power envelopes are a major differentiator. Intel's TDP is 9 W, while AMD's is 28 W. That is a 19 W gap, which explains why the AMD chip can sustain higher clocks across all cores. Intel's base clock is 1100 MHz with a boost of 4.80 GHz; AMD's base is 3.00 GHz with a boost of 4.70 GHz. Intel has the higher peak boost, but AMD starts much higher at base, which helps in short-duration single-threaded bursts.

Memory support differs in one key detail. Both use DDR5 and dual-channel buses, but AMD lists a specific memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while Intel's bandwidth is not recorded. AMD's memory bus advantage likely contributes to its wins in compression and string sorting, which are memory-latency-bound. PCIe connectivity also differs: Intel has Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes, AMD has Gen 4 with 14 CPU lanes. AMD's extra lanes matter for systems that need more direct NVMe or GPU bandwidth.

Integrated graphics are different as well. Intel uses Arc Xe-LPG 64EU, while AMD uses Radeon 740M. The database does not record graphics benchmarks, so no performance comparison is possible from the data. Both chips are mobile parts, active production, and use locked multipliers. Intel's socket is BGA 2551, AMD's is FP7. AMD lists two part numbers for different FP7 variants, Intel lists one (SRN85).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results are the most instructive because they show how the two chips scale under different rendering loads. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, Intel wins 1304 to 1097, a 18.9% margin. In R15 single-core, Intel wins 225 to 154, a massive 46.1% lead. But the tables turn in R20 and R23. In R20 multi-core, AMD wins 4571 to 4488, just 1.8% ahead. In R20 single-core, AMD wins 645 to 633, 1.9% ahead. In R23 multi-core, AMD wins 10884 to 8766, a 19.5% blowout. In R23 single-core, Intel barely claws back, winning 1590 to 1536, only 3.5% ahead.

The R23 multi-core result is the single largest win for either chip in the Cinebench suite. AMD's 10884 versus Intel's 8766 means a workload that scales for multiple minutes will heavily favor AMD, despite Intel having 8 more cores and 6 more threads. This suggests AMD's Zen 4 cores sustain higher throughput under longer rendering loads, possibly due to the higher 28 W TDP allowing sustained clocks. Intel's 9 W TDP likely forces aggressive power throttling in longer multi-core scenarios.

PassMark tells a different story. Intel wins floating-point math 33581 to 23017, a 45.9% lead, and integer math 50387 to 37468, a 34.5% lead. Intel also wins physics 918 to 685, a 34% lead, and prime-number finding 56 to 43, a 30.2% lead. Data encryption goes Intel's way 8838 to 8012, a 10.3% margin. Intel wins PassMark multithread 13296 to 12805, a modest 3.8% lead.

AMD's PassMark wins are in single-thread and memory-heavy tests. PassMark single-thread goes AMD 3648 to 2996, a 17.9% lead. Random string sorting goes AMD 17725 to 15131, a 14.6% lead. Data compression goes AMD 146273 to 137133, a 6.2% lead. Extended instructions goes AMD 11059 to 7918, a 28.4% lead. The extended instructions gap is striking: AMD's Zen 4 cores handle vectorized and SIMD-style workloads far more efficiently, despite Intel winning raw floating-point math by a wide margin.

Overall, the benchmark data shows Intel winning on raw arithmetic throughput and physics, while AMD wins on memory-heavy and single-threaded efficiency. The average benchmark scores are close: Intel's average is 17074, AMD's is 16663, a difference of about 2.4%. Both chips sit near the same performance percentile, with Intel at 71 and AMD at 70.

FAQ

Q: Which chip is faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: AMD Ryzen 3 8440U wins by 19.5%, scoring 10884 versus Intel's 8766.

Q: Which chip has the higher boost clock?

A: Intel Core Ultra 7 164U boosts to 4.80 GHz, while AMD Ryzen 3 8440U boosts to 4.70 GHz.

Q: How do the core counts compare?

A: Intel has 12 cores and 14 threads; AMD has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Which chip is better for floating-point math?

A: Intel wins PassMark floating-point math by 45.9%, scoring 33581 versus AMD's 23017.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: Intel is rated at 9 W, AMD at 28 W, a 19 W difference.

Q: Which chip wins in single-threaded PassMark?

A: AMD wins PassMark single-thread by 17.9%, scoring 3648 versus Intel's 2996.

The Verdict

The data points to two distinct buyers. If your workload is sustained multi-core rendering, compression, or extended instruction sets, the AMD Ryzen 3 8440U is the stronger choice. Its 19.5% Cinebench R23 multi-core win and 28.4% extended instructions lead are not marginal. The 28 W TDP gives it the headroom to keep Zen 4 cores running at high clocks, and the 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth supports memory-hungry tasks like string sorting and compression.

If your workload is heavy arithmetic, physics, encryption, or mixed integer/floating-point math, the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U is clearly better. Its 45.9% floating-point lead and 34.5% integer lead are massive, and its 34% physics win makes it the pick for simulation-style tasks. The 12-core layout gives it raw throughput that AMD cannot match in PassMark's compute subtests, and the 46.1% Cinebench R15 single-core win suggests excellent short-burst performance despite the low 9 W TDP.

For general use, the average benchmark scores are close enough that the choice comes down to specific software. Intel sits at the 71st percentile with an average score of 17074; AMD sits at the 70th percentile with 16663. Both are active mobile parts with locked multipliers. Intel's launch MSRP is $448. The database does not record an MSRP for AMD. Neither supports ECC memory. Both use DDR5 and dual-channel buses.

Pick Intel for compute-heavy productivity, pick AMD for memory-sensitive and single-threaded workloads. The 19 W TDP gap means AMD will demand more cooling and battery, but that power budget buys consistent multi-core performance. Intel's 9 W TDP makes it a better fit for fanless or ultra-thin designs, provided the workload stays within its compute strengths.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Core Ultra 7 164U | AMD Ryzen 3 8440U |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 12 | 4 |

| Threads | 14 | 8 |

| Base clock | 1100 MHz | 3000 MHz |

| Boost clock | 4800 MHz | 4700 MHz |

| TDP | 9 W | 28 W |

| Process node | 7 nm | 4 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 20,900 million |

| Die size | Not recorded | 137 mm² |

| L1 cache | 112 KB per core | 64 KB per core |

| L2 cache | 2 MB per core | 1 MB per core |

| L3 cache | 12 MB shared | 8 MB shared |

| Memory bandwidth | Not recorded | 89.6 GB/s |

| PCIe lanes | Gen 4, 8 lanes | Gen 4, 14 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Arc Xe-LPG 64EU | Radeon 740M |

| Socket | Intel BGA 2551 | AMD Socket FP7 |

| Launch MSRP | $448 | Not recorded |

| Part number | SRN85 | 100-000001325 (FP7r2), 100-000001332 (FP7) |