AMD Ryzen 5 6600HS vs Intel Core i7-8700B Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a genuinely split picture between the AMD Ryzen 5 6600HS and the Intel Core i7-8700B, with each processor claiming victory in different rendering workloads. The most dramatic separation appears in the Cinebench R15 tests, where the AMD part dominates by a wide margin. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ryzen 5 6600HS scores 1656 against the Intel’s 1005, a 64.8% advantage. The single-core R15 result is similarly lopsided: 235 for AMD versus 141 for Intel, a 66.7% lead. These are the largest deltas in the entire comparison, and they indicate that in this particular legacy benchmark, the AMD architecture holds a commanding position.

However, the story reverses when moving to the newer Cinebench R23 workload. Here, the Intel Core i7-8700B takes the multi-core crown with a score of 9977, edging out the AMD’s 9131 by 8.5%. That is a notable reversal, suggesting that the Intel part scales better under the heavier, more sustained multi-threaded load of R23. In single-core R23, though, the AMD Ryzen 5 6600HS reclaims the lead with 1465 points versus 1408, a narrower 4% advantage. The overall win tally favors AMD at 3 wins out of 4 head-to-head comparisons, but the one Intel victory is significant because it comes in the most demanding multi-threaded test.

Interpreting these numbers requires attention to the magnitude of each win. The AMD’s R15 victories are massive — nearly two-thirds faster — while its R23 single-core win is modest. The Intel’s R23 multi-core win is moderate but not overwhelming. When placed in context with the average benchmark scores, the two CPUs are almost perfectly matched: AMD’s average is 3122, while Intel’s is 3086. The nearest rivals for the AMD part include the AMD Ryzen 3 5425U at 3124 (0.1% higher) and the Intel Core i3-13100TE at 3111 (0.4% lower), showing that the 6600HS sits in a tightly clustered performance band. The Intel Core i7-8700B’s nearest rival is the Intel Xeon W-2133 at 3087 (0% delta), followed by the Intel Xeon E5-1660 v3 at 3082 (0.1% higher). Both CPUs occupy the 52nd percentile among all CPUs, reinforcing that they are peers in overall performance despite their divergent benchmark profiles.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is substantial, reflecting different design eras and market intents. The AMD Ryzen 5 6600HS is built on the Zen 3+ architecture, codenamed Rembrandt, and manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It belongs to AMD’s 6000 series and targets the mobile segment, using the AMD Socket FP7. The chip features 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. Its thermal design power is 35 watts, which is modest for a 6-core part and indicates efficiency-focused engineering. The die size is 208 mm², and the cache hierarchy consists of 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache.

In contrast, the Intel Core i7-8700B is a Coffee Lake part, built on Intel’s 14 nm process and produced in-house at Intel. It is classified as a desktop segment CPU, despite using the Intel BGA 1440 socket, and is now marked as end-of-life. The core configuration is identical on paper — 6 cores and 12 threads — but the clocks differ slightly: 3.20 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost. The thermal design power is 65 watts, nearly double the AMD’s figure. The die size is smaller at 154 mm², but the cache configuration is more limited: L1 is 64 KB per core, L2 is halved to 256 KB per core, and L3 is 12 MB shared, which is 4 MB less than the AMD part.

Memory support marks another clear divergence. The Ryzen 5 6600HS uses DDR5 memory with dual-channel configuration and a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The Intel Core i7-8700B uses DDR4, also dual-channel, but with a much lower bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. That is a 34.1 GB/s difference in theoretical memory throughput, which can influence performance in memory-sensitive workloads. PCIe connectivity also differs: AMD offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while Intel provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes. The integrated graphics are different as well — the AMD part includes Radeon 660M, while the Intel has UHD Graphics 630. Neither processor supports ECC memory, and both have locked multipliers, so overclocking is not an option for either.

Where Each One Wins

Looking strictly at the benchmark wins, the AMD Ryzen 5 6600HS is the clear victor in Cinebench R15, both multi-core and single-core. The 64.8% and 66.7% deltas are not marginal; they are categorical advantages. This suggests the AMD architecture excels in older, shorter-duration rendering tasks, possibly due to its higher memory bandwidth and more modern instruction set. Users running legacy applications or benchmarks that resemble R15’s workload pattern would see a substantial performance uplift with the AMD part. Additionally, the AMD’s single-core R23 win, though only 4%, indicates that it also holds a slight edge in lightly threaded modern workloads.

The Intel Core i7-8700B, on the other hand, wins decisively in Cinebench R23 multi-core, the most representative of heavy sustained rendering among the available tests. The 8.5% advantage over the AMD in this test suggests that under prolonged full-core utilization, the Intel part manages thermal and power delivery in a way that allows higher sustained throughput. This could matter for video encoding, 3D rendering, or other workloads that hammer all cores for extended periods. The Intel part also has the higher boost clock at 4.60 GHz versus 4.50 GHz, which may contribute to its ability to sustain performance in certain scenarios.

The use-case split is therefore relatively clean. If the workload is dominated by short-duration multi-threaded bursts or by single-threaded response — as in R15 or R23 single-core — the AMD Ryzen 5 6600HS is the better choice. If the workload involves long, continuous multi-threaded rendering, the Intel Core i7-8700B’s R23 multi-core win gives it the edge. The data does not support a single all-round winner; it supports a workload-dependent selection.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 6600HS has an average benchmark score of 3122, while the Intel Core i7-8700B has an average of 3086. The difference is 36 points, roughly 1.2%, which is negligible in real-world terms.

Q: How do the two CPUs compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core i7-8700B wins this test with a score of 9977, beating the AMD Ryzen 5 6600HS’s 9131 by 8.5%. This is the only head-to-head test that Intel wins.

Q: What is the largest performance gap in the head-to-head tests?

A: The largest gap is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the AMD Ryzen 5 6600HS scores 235 against the Intel’s 141, a 66.7% advantage. The R15 multi-core gap is nearly as large at 64.8%.

Q: Do both processors have the same core and thread counts?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen 5 6600HS and the Intel Core i7-8700B have 6 cores and 12 threads. They differ in clock speeds, cache sizes, memory support, and manufacturing process.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 6600HS supports DDR5 with a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The Intel Core i7-8700B supports DDR4 with a bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. The AMD part offers 34.1 GB/s more theoretical bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has a smaller manufacturing process node?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 6600HS is built on a 6 nm process at TSMC, while the Intel Core i7-8700B uses Intel’s 14 nm process. The AMD part is manufactured on a significantly more advanced node.

The Verdict

The data presents a nuanced choice rather than a clear winner. For users prioritizing legacy benchmark performance, particularly Cinebench R15, the AMD Ryzen 5 6600HS is the obvious pick — its 64.8% multi-core and 66.7% single-core leads over the Intel are overwhelming. The AMD part also offers the advantages of DDR5 memory support with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth, a more modern 6 nm process, and significantly lower power consumption at 35 watts TDP versus 65 watts. Its mobile market segment designation and active production status suggest it is a current, efficient part.

However, for users whose primary workload is sustained multi-threaded rendering similar to Cinebench R23, the Intel Core i7-8700B is superior, with an 8.5% higher multi-core score. The Intel part also has a slightly higher boost clock at 4.60 GHz. Its end-of-life status and 14 nm process make it an older design, but the R23 result shows it can still compete effectively in heavy rendering tasks. The 65-watt TDP might actually be an advantage in desktop-like scenarios where power draw is less constrained.

The overall percentile rankings are identical at the 52nd percentile, and the average benchmark scores are within 1.2% of each other. This is a textbook example of two processors with different strengths. The AMD Ryzen 5 6600HS should be chosen by users who value efficiency, modern memory support, and performance in legacy or single-threaded workloads. The Intel Core i7-8700B should be chosen by users who need maximum sustained multi-threaded throughput in modern rendering applications. The decision hinges entirely on the specific workload profile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 6600HS | Intel Core i7-8700B |

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

| Series | 6000 series | null |

| Base Clock | 3.30 GHz | 3.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.50 GHz | 4.60 GHz |

| TDP | 35 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP7 | Intel BGA 1440 |

| Architecture | Zen 3+ | Coffee Lake |

| Codename | Rembrandt | Coffee Lake |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die Size | 208 mm² | 154 mm² |

| L2 Cache | 512 KB (per core) | 256 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 16 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR4 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 42.7 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 660M | UHD Graphics 630 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | null | 2018-04-02 |

| Launch MSRP | null | $303 |

| Part Number | 100-000000546100-000000562 | SRCX2 |