AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS vs Intel Core Ultra 5 235H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data leaves no ambiguity: the Intel Core Ultra 5 235H wins every single benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, 17 wins to zero. The largest gap appears in PassMark's find prime numbers test, where Intel scores 239 against AMD's 48, a delta of -79.9% for the Ryzen part. That is not a marginal difference; it is a near-total dominance in that specific workload. The floating point math test shows a similarly lopsided result, with Intel at 93,509 versus AMD's 27,800, a -70.3% delta.

The Cinebench suite tells a consistent story across all three versions. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, Intel posts 25,598 while AMD manages 12,342, a -51.8% delta. Single-core R23 shows Intel at 3,613 against AMD's 1,742, again -51.8%. The pattern repeats in R20 and R15: every multi-core and single-core run lands at roughly the same -51.8% or -51.9% delta. The consistency of these percentages across generations of the Cinebench test suggests the performance gap is structural, not workload-specific.

Some workloads show a narrower divide. PassMark integer math has Intel at 74,247 versus AMD's 50,800, a -31.6% delta, the smallest gap in the entire comparison. Single-threaded PassMark results are also comparatively close: Intel scores 4,359, AMD scores 2,740, a -37.1% delta. Data compression favors Intel at 301,979 versus 168,692, a -44.1% delta. Even the closest results still represent a substantial Intel advantage.

The mid-range gaps cluster around the -51% to -53% mark. PassMark multi-thread shows Intel at 30,091 against AMD's 14,520, a -51.7% delta. Data encryption lands at -53.6% (23,121 versus 10,718). Extended instructions show -52% (23,354 versus 11,219). Random string sorting shows -51.2% (36,208 versus 17,669). Physics simulation shows -58.6% (1,985 versus 821). These figures indicate that the Intel part roughly doubles AMD's throughput in most multi-threaded scenarios, while the single-thread advantage is smaller but still decisive.

The average benchmark score reinforces the overall picture. Intel's average is 37,522, placing it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs in the database. AMD's average is 19,364, which lands in the 73rd percentile. The Intel part's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-13900HK (average 37,425, delta 0.3%) and the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F (average 37,313, delta 0.6%). The AMD part sits near the Intel Core Ultra 5 226V (average 19,368, delta 0%) and the Intel Core i7-8700K (average 19,238, delta 0.7%). In other words, the AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS competes with desktop CPUs from several generations ago, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 235H operates in the company of modern high-end mobile and desktop parts.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design generations. AMD's Ryzen 5 7533HS uses the Zen 3+ architecture, codenamed Rembrandt-R, built on a 6 nm process at TSMC. Intel's Core Ultra 5 235H uses the Arrow Lake architecture, codenamed Arrow Lake-H, built on a 3 nm process, also at TSMC. The process node difference alone, 6 nm versus 3 nm, explains part of the efficiency and performance gap, though the architectural generation gap is larger: Zen 3+ dates to AMD's 7000 series mobile lineup, while Arrow Lake is Intel's Core Ultra Series 2.

Core counts differ sharply. The AMD part offers 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel part offers 14 cores and 14 threads. The thread count parity with core count on Intel indicates a design without Hyper-Threading on this particular configuration, whereas AMD relies on simultaneous multithreading to reach 12 threads from 6 cores. Clock behavior also differs: AMD's base clock is 3.30 GHz with a boost of 4.40 GHz, while Intel's base clock is 2.40 GHz with a boost of 5.00 GHz. The lower base clock on Intel is typical of a hybrid architecture with efficiency cores, but the 5.00 GHz boost ceiling gives it a clear single-thread advantage.

Cache hierarchies are substantially different. AMD provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. Intel provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. Intel's L2 cache is six times larger per core, which helps explain its dominance in cache-sensitive workloads like prime number finding and floating point math. The die size is recorded only for AMD at 208 mm²; no die size is listed for the Intel part.

Memory support also diverges. AMD supports DDR5 only, on a dual-channel bus, with a recorded bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. Intel supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, with a recorded bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The 25.6 GB/s bandwidth advantage for Intel contributes to its lead in data-heavy tasks. PCIe connectivity differs as well: AMD offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while Intel offers Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only). The newer PCIe generation on Intel provides higher per-lane bandwidth, though the lane count is lower.

Integrated graphics differentiate the two as well. AMD uses the Radeon 660M, while Intel uses Arc Graphics 140T. The database records no benchmark scores for either iGPU, so no quantitative comparison is possible from this data. Both processors share a dual-channel memory bus, no ECC support, a mobile market segment, active production status, and a locked multiplier. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP7, while Intel uses Intel BGA 2049. Release dates differ by roughly four months: AMD appeared on 2024-08-31, Intel on 2025-01-12. Neither part has a recorded launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235H scores 25,598 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS scores 12,342. The delta is -51.8% for AMD, meaning Intel is roughly twice as fast.

Q: How large is the single-thread performance gap?

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 3,613 versus AMD's 1,742, a -51.8% delta. PassMark single-thread shows Intel at 4,359 versus AMD's 2,740, a -37.1% delta. The gap is consistent but slightly smaller in PassMark's test.

Q: What is the closest benchmark result between the two?

A: PassMark integer math shows the smallest delta at -31.6%, with Intel scoring 74,247 and AMD scoring 50,800. Every other recorded benchmark has a larger Intel advantage.

Q: Do the processors use the same manufacturing process?

A: No. AMD uses a 6 nm process at TSMC, while Intel uses a 3 nm process at TSMC. Both are manufactured by TSMC, but on different nodes.

Q: How do their cache configurations compare?

A: AMD has 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. Intel has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. Intel's per-core L2 is substantially larger.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each support?

A: AMD supports DDR5 on a dual-channel bus with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth. Intel supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X on a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Where does each processor rank among all CPUs in the database?

A: Intel sits in the 85th percentile with an average benchmark score of 37,522. AMD sits in the 73rd percentile with an average benchmark score of 19,364.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear division of roles. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235H is the stronger processor by every measured metric. Its average benchmark score of 37,522 versus AMD's 19,364 represents a 93.8% higher average, and its 85th percentile ranking versus AMD's 73rd percentile shows where each sits in the broader CPU landscape. The Intel part's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-13900HK and the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F, both high-end mobile or desktop parts. The AMD part's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 226V and the Intel Core i7-8700K, the latter being a desktop CPU from an older generation.

For multi-threaded workloads, the Intel part is the only reasonable choice from this data. It doubles or nearly doubles AMD's scores in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core, in PassMark multi-thread, data compression, data encryption, and extended instructions. The physics test shows a -58.6% delta, and the prime number test shows a -79.9% delta, both indicating workloads where AMD falls far behind. The Intel part's 14 cores, larger caches, and higher memory bandwidth all contribute to these results.

For single-threaded workloads, Intel also leads, though by a smaller margin. The Cinebench single-core tests cluster around -51.8%, while PassMark single-thread shows -37.1%. The 5.00 GHz boost clock on Intel versus 4.40 GHz on AMD explains some of this advantage, as does the newer 3 nm process. Even the smallest gap, PassMark integer math at -31.6%, still favors Intel by a wide margin.

The AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS is not without its own profile. It uses a 6 nm process, offers 12 threads from 6 cores, and carries a 35 W TDP versus Intel's 28 W. The database does not record power efficiency benchmarks, so no direct efficiency verdict is possible. What the data does show is that AMD's part competes with the Intel Core i7-8700K and Intel Core Ultra 5 226V in average score, placing it in a lower performance tier entirely.

The verdict from the recorded data is straightforward: the Intel Core Ultra 5 235H is the higher-performing processor across all 17 head-to-head benchmarks, with an average score nearly double that of the AMD part. The AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS delivers performance comparable to older desktop CPUs, while the Intel part matches modern high-end mobile processors. Any workload that benefits from CPU throughput, cache capacity, or memory bandwidth will favor Intel based on these measurements.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS | Intel Core Ultra 5 235H |

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

| Series | 7000 series | Core Ultra Series 2 |

| Cores | 6 | 14 |

| Threads | 12 | 14 |

| Base clock | 3.30 GHz | 2.40 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.40 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 35 W | 28 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP7 | Intel BGA 2049 |

| Architecture | Zen 3+ | Arrow Lake |

| Codename | Rembrandt-R | Arrow Lake-H |

| Process node | 6 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Die size | 208 mm² | Not recorded |

| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 16 MB (shared) | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory bus | Dual-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 8 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon 660M | Arc Graphics 140T |

| Release date | 2024-08-31 | 2025-01-12 |

| Part number | 100-000001632(FP7), 100-000001634(FP7r2) | SRQAP |

Both parts share the mobile market segment, active production status, no ECC memory support, and a locked multiplier. Neither has a recorded launch MSRP in the database.