AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS vs Intel Core i5-11600KF Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a dominant performance profile for the Intel Core i5-11600KF in nearly every measured workload. Out of the 23 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, the Intel part wins 22, with the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS managing a single victory. The scale of Intel’s advantage varies sharply by test type, from narrow single-thread margins to overwhelming multi-thread leads.

The most striking result is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Intel Core i5-11600KF scores 16,503 against the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS’s 8,613, a delta of 91.6%. This is not a marginal win; it is nearly double the AMD processor’s output. This pattern repeats in Cinebench R23 single-core, where Intel leads 2,329 to 1,445, a 61.2% advantage. The Cinebench R15 tests tell a more tempered story: multi-core shows Intel ahead by 14.1% (1,663 vs. 1,457), while single-core is nearly a tie, with Intel edging out 234 to 232, a 0.9% margin. The R23 results indicate that the Intel chip scales far better under sustained, modern multi-threaded rendering loads, while the older R15 single-core test barely separates the two.

In the 3DMark suite, the Intel processor wins all six recorded sub-tests. The margins range from 10.3% in single-thread (962 vs. 872) to 18.1% in max-threads (6,240 vs. 5,285). The 16-thread test shows a 17.9% lead (6,237 vs. 5,292), and the 8-thread test shows a 15.5% lead (5,238 vs. 4,537). The 2-thread and 4-thread tests show 10.5% and 10.4% leads, respectively. These results suggest Intel holds a consistent, broad advantage across thread-count scaling in synthetic 3D workloads.

Geekbench results align with the 3DMark pattern. Intel leads multi-core by 18.1% (8,688 vs. 7,354) and single-core by 15.1% (1,904 vs. 1,654). The PassMark suite offers a more mixed picture. Intel wins data compression by 9.5% (242,730 vs. 221,668), extended instructions by 14.3% (17,619 vs. 15,411), prime numbers by 20.4% (59 vs. 49), floating-point math by 7.3% (38,129 vs. 35,540), integer math by a slim 2.9% (64,195 vs. 62,372), multithread by 8.9% (19,513 vs. 17,914), physics by 13% (954 vs. 844), random string sorting by 21.9% (27,767 vs. 22,781), and single-thread by 6.5% (3,327 vs. 3,123). The lone AMD win comes in data encryption, where the Ryzen 5 7535HS scores 13,656 against Intel’s 12,198, a 10.7% advantage. This is the only test where the AMD part demonstrates a meaningful performance edge.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher overall average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-11600KF has an average benchmark score of 19,723, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS averages 19,047. The Intel part sits higher, though both occupy the 73rd percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Q: How does the Intel Core i5-11600KF compare to its closest rivals?

A: The Intel part’s nearest rival is the Intel Core i5-11600K, which scores 19,786, making the 11600KF 0.3% slower. The Intel Core i5-12500 scores 19,668, a 0.3% deficit for the rival. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 430 scores 19,617 (0.5% behind), and the AMD Ryzen 5 5500 scores 19,593 (0.7% behind).

Q: What is the biggest performance gap in the head-to-head results?

A: The largest delta is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Intel Core i5-11600KF leads by 91.6%, scoring 16,503 versus the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS’s 8,613. This is far larger than any other difference in the recorded tests.

Q: Is there any workload where the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS beats the Intel Core i5-11600KF?

A: Yes, in PassMark data encryption, the AMD part scores 13,656 versus Intel’s 12,198, a 10.7% win. This is the only head-to-head test where AMD takes the lead.

Q: How do the single-thread performances compare in the older Cinebench R15 test?

A: They are nearly identical. Intel scores 234 and AMD scores 232, a 0.9% difference. This is the closest margin in any of the benchmark comparisons.

Q: What is the average score difference between the two processors?

A: The Intel Core i5-11600KF has an average score of 19,723, which is 676 points higher than the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS’s 19,047. This represents roughly a 3.5% advantage for Intel in overall average performance.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies and market segments. The Intel Core i5-11600KF is a desktop part built on Rocket Lake architecture, using Intel’s 14 nm process node with a die size of 276 mm². It is manufactured by Intel itself. The AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS is a mobile processor based on the Zen 3+ architecture, codenamed Rembrandt-R, fabricated on TSMC’s 6 nm node with a smaller die size of 208 mm².

Both CPUs have 6 cores and 12 threads, but their cache hierarchies differ. The Intel part has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part has 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a larger 16 MB of shared L3 cache. Despite having more L3 cache, the AMD chip trails in most multi-threaded benchmarks, suggesting that cache capacity alone does not compensate for other architectural differences.

Clock speeds favor Intel. The Intel Core i5-11600KF has a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS operates at a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.55 GHz. The Intel part also has a higher thermal design power (TDP) of 125 watts compared to AMD’s 35 watts, reflecting its desktop orientation versus the mobile power envelope of the Ryzen part.

Memory support is another clear divider. Intel uses DDR4 with dual-channel support and a memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. AMD supports DDR5, also dual-channel, but with a higher memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. This bandwidth advantage does not translate into benchmark wins for AMD in the recorded data, suggesting that the Intel architecture’s other strengths outweigh the memory throughput difference.

The Intel processor has no integrated graphics, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS includes Radeon 660M integrated graphics. The Intel part is multiplier-unlocked, allowing overclocking, while the AMD part is locked. The Intel chip uses an Intel Socket 1200 interface, and the AMD chip uses an AMD Socket FP7. The Intel part is marked as end-of-life in production status, while the AMD part is active. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $237; the AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP.

The Verdict

The data points decisively toward the Intel Core i5-11600KF for anyone prioritizing raw compute performance. It wins 22 of 23 head-to-head tests, and the margins are often large. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel part delivers nearly double the score of the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS, a 91.6% lead. Even in the closest single-thread test, Cinebench R15, Intel holds a slight edge. The only area where AMD wins is data encryption, where it leads by 10.7%. For rendering, synthetic 3D workloads, and general math operations, the Intel desktop processor is the clear choice based on benchmark results.

However, the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS is a mobile processor with a 35-watt TDP, while the Intel part is a desktop chip with a 125-watt TDP. The AMD chip also includes integrated graphics and supports DDR5 memory with higher bandwidth. The recorded data does not include power efficiency metrics or gaming performance, so any recommendation must remain confined to the benchmark scores. If the workload is heavily weighted toward encryption, the AMD part has a specific advantage. Otherwise, the Intel Core i5-11600KF outperforms the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS in nearly every measured category.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-11600KF | AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS |

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

| Base Clock | 3.90 GHz | 3.30 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.90 GHz | 4.55 GHz |

| TDP | 125 W | 35 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1200 | AMD Socket FP7 |

| Architecture | Rocket Lake | Zen 3+ |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 6 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Die Size | 276 mm² | 208 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |

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

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

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | 76.8 GB/s |

| Integrated Graphics | None | Radeon 660M |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

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

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Launch MSRP | $237 | None |