AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265F Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents a complete sweep: Intel Core Ultra 7 265F wins all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS taking zero wins. The margins are substantial and consistent across rendering, compute, and system-level workloads.

In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Intel part scores 41,980 against the AMD's 12,342, a delta of -70.6%. That same percentage gap repeats across the entire Cinebench suite: R15 multicore (4,231 vs 1,243), R20 multicore (17,631 vs 5,183), and R15 singlecore (597 vs 175). The uniform -70.6% delta across all four Cinebench multicore tests suggests a fixed performance ceiling difference rather than workload-specific variation.

Single-core performance tells a similar story. Cinebench R23 singlecore shows Intel at 5,926 versus AMD at 1,742, again a -70.6% gap. The R20 singlecore test (2,488 vs 731) and R15 singlecore (597 vs 175) carry the identical delta. This consistency indicates the architectural gap between Zen 3+ and Arrow Lake is systemic, not test-dependent.

PassMark results show more varied deltas, revealing where each architecture's strengths and weaknesses lie. The smallest gap is in passmark_single_thread: Intel scores 4,750, AMD scores 2,740, a delta of -42.3%. This is the closest margin in the entire dataset, suggesting the AMD core is comparatively less disadvantaged in pure single-threaded throughput than in heavily parallel workloads.

The largest gap appears in passmark_find_prime_numbers, where Intel's 416 dwarfs AMD's 48, a -88.5% delta. Floating point math follows closely: Intel at 173,855 versus AMD at 27,800, a -84% gap. Physics testing shows a -74.1% delta (3,172 vs 821), while data encryption shows -72.8% (39,468 vs 10,718).

The mid-range deltas cluster around -63% to -72%. PassMark integer math delivers 138,078 for Intel versus 50,800 for AMD, a -63.2% gap. Data compression shows 507,018 versus 168,692, a -66.7% delta. Extended instructions (39,235 vs 11,219) and random string sorting (62,439 vs 17,669) sit at -71.4% and -71.7% respectively. Multithread testing (49,410 vs 14,520) repeats the -70.6% figure seen in Cinebench.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265F wins every recorded benchmark category, so the use-case split is defined by margin size rather than victory allocation. The AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS has no benchmark category where it leads.

The closest relative performance for AMD appears in single-threaded PassMark testing. The -42.3% delta in passmark_single_thread indicates that if a workload depends primarily on one core with minimal parallel scaling, the AMD part is least disadvantaged. Still, Intel's absolute score is higher by a wide margin.

Prime number calculation and floating point math show the widest gaps, meaning AMD is most severely outpaced in computationally intensive scalar and floating-point workloads. The -88.5% and -84% deltas suggest these tasks heavily favor Intel's wider execution resources and higher boost clocks.

For memory-bandwidth-sensitive tasks, the data implies Intel's advantage grows. Data compression and encryption, both throughput-oriented, show -66.7% and -72.8% deltas respectively. The Intel part's 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth versus AMD's 76.8 GB/s likely contributes to these outcomes, though the benchmark data alone cannot isolate memory effects from core-count effects.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design points. AMD's Ryzen 5 7533HS uses the Zen 3+ architecture on a 6 nm TSMC process, with a die size of 208 mm². Intel's Core Ultra 7 265F uses Arrow Lake on a 3 nm TSMC process with a 243 mm² die and 17,800 million transistors.

Core configuration differs sharply. AMD provides 6 cores and 12 threads, while Intel offers 20 cores and 20 threads. The Intel part uses no simultaneous multithreading, yet its raw core count advantage is decisive in the benchmark results. AMD's base clock of 3.30 GHz exceeds Intel's 2.40 GHz, but Intel's boost clock of 5.30 GHz far surpasses AMD's 4.40 GHz.

Cache hierarchies reflect the generational gap. AMD allocates 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3. Intel allocates 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 30 MB shared L3. The Intel part's larger per-core L2 and more than double the L3 capacity likely feed its higher single-thread and multi-thread scores.

Memory support is DDR5 for both, dual-channel for both, but bandwidth differs: Intel lists 102.4 GB/s versus AMD's 76.8 GB/s. PCIe generation differs as well: AMD uses Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes, Intel uses Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics separate the two. AMD includes Radeon 660M; Intel lists N/A. This makes the AMD part self-contained for displays while the Intel part requires a discrete GPU. Thermal design power also differs substantially: AMD at 35 W versus Intel at 65 W. The AMD part targets the mobile segment on Socket FP7, while Intel targets desktop on Socket 1851.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265F has 20 cores and 20 threads. The AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS has 6 cores and 12 threads. Intel's core count is more than triple AMD's, though Intel does not use simultaneous multithreading.

Q: What is the single-core performance gap?

A: In Cinebench R23 singlecore, Intel scores 5,926 against AMD's 1,742, a -70.6% delta. In PassMark single_thread, Intel scores 4,750 against AMD's 2,740, a -42.3% delta. The PassMark gap is the smallest of any benchmark in the dataset.

Q: How do the cache sizes compare?

A: AMD has 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3. Intel has 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 30 MB shared L3. Intel's L3 cache is nearly double AMD's.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory type?

A: Both support DDR5 and dual-channel memory. However, memory bandwidth differs: Intel lists 102.4 GB/s while AMD lists 76.8 GB/s.

Q: Which processor includes integrated graphics?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS includes Radeon 660M integrated graphics. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265F lists N/A for integrated graphics, meaning it requires a discrete graphics card.

Q: What are the thermal design power ratings?

A: AMD is rated at 35 W TDP, Intel at 65 W TDP. The AMD part is designed for mobile use on Socket FP7, while the Intel part is a desktop processor on Socket 1851.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents an unambiguous outcome. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265F outperforms the AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS in every single recorded test, with deltas ranging from -42.3% to -88.5%. The Intel part's 93rd percentile ranking among all CPUs versus AMD's 73rd percentile confirms the gap extends beyond this direct comparison.

The average benchmark score tells the same story: Intel at 64,438 versus AMD at 19,364. Intel's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and AMD EPYC 7343, both within -0.6% to 0.4% of its average score. AMD's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 226V and Intel Core i7-8700K, placing it in a completely different performance tier.

The AMD processor's advantages are structural rather than performance-based: lower 35 W TDP, integrated graphics, and mobile socket compatibility. The Intel processor's advantages are measured in the benchmark results: higher core count, larger caches, faster boost clock, greater memory bandwidth, and PCIe Gen 5 support.

For workloads where the recorded data applies, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F is the superior choice. The AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS remains relevant only in contexts where its mobile form factor, integrated graphics, and lower power envelope are the primary selection criteria, independent of raw benchmark performance.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS | Intel Core Ultra 7 265F |

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

| Cores | 6 | 20 |

| Threads | 12 | 20 |

| Base clock | 3.30 GHz | 2.40 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.40 GHz | 5.30 GHz |

| TDP | 35 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP7 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Architecture | Zen 3+ | Arrow Lake |

| Codename | Rembrandt-R | Arrow Lake-S |

| Process node | 6 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not listed | 17,800 million |

| Die size | 208 mm² | 243 mm² |

| 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 | 30 MB shared |

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

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes | Gen 5, 20 Lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon 660M | N/A |

| Market segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release date | 2024-08-31 | 2025-01-06 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | $379 |

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

| Percentile vs all CPUs | 73 | 93 |

| Average benchmark score | 19,364 | 64,438 |