AMD Ryzen 5 8645HS vs Intel Core Ultra 7 155H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear split between the AMD Ryzen 5 8645HS and the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H, with Intel winning 11 of the 15 recorded comparisons and AMD taking 4. The most decisive Intel victories come in compute-heavy workloads. In PassMark physics simulation, the Core Ultra 7 155H scores 1727 against the Ryzen 5 8645HS's 1095, a commanding 36.6% advantage. Floating point math also heavily favors Intel: 63703 versus 44833, a 29.6% gap. The pattern continues with prime number finding, where Intel leads by 33.6% (113 versus 75), and integer math, where the Core Ultra 7 155H posts 86870 against 72640, a 16.4% margin.

Multithreaded rendering workloads tell a similar story. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel chip scores 15028 versus AMD's 13220, a 12% lead. The older Cinebench R15 multi-core test shows an even larger 14.5% gap, with Intel at 2450 and AMD at 2094. The PassMark multi-thread test adds another Intel win, 24873 versus 22586, a 9.2% advantage. Data compression and encryption also favor Intel, with margins of 4.3% and 4.7% respectively. The closest Intel victory comes in random string sorting, where the Core Ultra 7 155H edges ahead by just 0.8% (31990 versus 31748).

AMD's wins are fewer but focused on specific strengths. The Ryzen 5 8645HS dominates in extended instruction set workloads, scoring 20003 against Intel's 16456, a substantial 21.6% advantage. Single-thread performance also favors AMD. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Ryzen chip scores 270 versus 255, a 5.9% lead. PassMark single-thread testing repeats this outcome, with AMD at 3653 against Intel's 3468, a 5.3% margin. Notably, the Cinebench R23 single-core result breaks the pattern: Intel wins narrowly at 1743 versus 1714, a 1.7% edge, despite AMD claiming the other two single-thread tests.

The average benchmark scores place both processors in the same overall percentile tier, at 83rd percentile among all CPUs. AMD's average score is 33244, while Intel's is 32697. Looking at the nearest rivals in the database, the Ryzen 5 8645HS sits within 0.5% of the AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX (delta 0.5) and within 0.1% of the Intel Core i7-14701E and AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 6950H. The Core Ultra 7 155H is essentially tied with the Intel Core i5-14600T (delta 0), 0.1% behind the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360, and 0.2% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 155H is the clear choice for heavily threaded workloads. Its 16-core, 22-thread configuration delivers wins across Cinebench multi-core tests, PassMark multi-thread, physics simulation, floating point math, integer math, and prime number finding. For users running video rendering, 3D simulation, scientific computing, or any workload that scales across cores, the data shows Intel holding a 9.2% to 36.6% advantage depending on the specific task. The physics test gap of 36.6% is particularly striking, suggesting substantial headroom in simulation-style workloads.

The Core Ultra 7 155H also handles data manipulation tasks well. It wins data compression by 4.3% and data encryption by 4.7%, making it the better option for file archiving, database operations, and encrypted storage workflows. Even in the near-tie random string sorting test, Intel comes out ahead, albeit by a slim 0.8%.

The AMD Ryzen 5 8645HS carves out its own territory in single-threaded responsiveness and specialized instruction execution. The 5.9% lead in Cinebench R15 single-core and 5.3% lead in PassMark single-thread indicate snappier performance in lightly threaded applications, legacy software, and everyday tasks that depend on one or two cores. The 21.6% advantage in extended instructions is the standout AMD win, pointing to strong performance in workloads that leverage advanced x86 instruction set extensions, such as certain cryptography, multimedia encoding, and simulation code paths.

For users who prioritize raw single-core speed and instruction-set flexibility, the Ryzen 5 8645HS delivers. For those who need maximum multi-core throughput, the Core Ultra 7 155H is the database's clear recommendation. The Cinebench R23 single-core result (Intel by 1.7%) adds nuance, showing that the single-thread crown is not absolute, but the PassMark and R15 data consistently favor AMD in this category.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8645HS has an average benchmark score of 33244, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H averages 32697. Both processors sit at the 83rd percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Q: How large is Intel's multi-core advantage in Cinebench R23?

A: The Core Ultra 7 155H scores 15028 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 12% higher than the Ryzen 5 8645HS's score of 13220.

Q: Does AMD win any single-thread benchmarks?

A: Yes. The Ryzen 5 8645HS wins Cinebench R15 single-core by 5.9% (270 versus 255) and PassMark single-thread by 5.3% (3653 versus 3468). However, Intel wins Cinebench R23 single-core by 1.7% (1743 versus 1714).

Q: What is the biggest performance gap in either direction?

A: The largest Intel advantage is 36.6% in PassMark physics (1727 versus 1095). The largest AMD advantage is 21.6% in PassMark extended instructions (20003 versus 16456).

Q: How do these processors compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: The Ryzen 5 8645HS is within 0.5% of the AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX, 0.1% of the Intel Core i7-14701E, and 0.1% of the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 6950H. The Core Ultra 7 155H is tied with the Intel Core i5-14600T, 0.1% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360, and 0.2% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 7400F.

Q: Which processor wins more head-to-head benchmark comparisons?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 155H wins 11 of the 15 recorded head-to-head benchmarks. The AMD Ryzen 5 8645HS wins 4.

Specification Differences

The two processors diverge significantly in core configuration. The AMD Ryzen 5 8645HS uses 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H packs 16 cores and 22 threads. Base clocks differ, with AMD at 4.30 GHz and Intel at 3.80 GHz. Boost clocks also favor AMD, at 5.00 GHz versus Intel's 4.80 GHz. The thermal design power figures show a 45 watt specification for the Ryzen chip and 28 watts for the Core Ultra 7, though the database does not include real-world power consumption measurements.

Cache hierarchies are structured differently. The Ryzen 5 8645HS has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 7 155H uses 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. Memory support is listed as DDR5 for both, with dual-channel buses and identical 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth figures. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity differs. The AMD chip offers PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while Intel provides PCIe Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics solutions are distinct: AMD uses the Radeon 760M, while Intel uses the Arc Xe-LPG 128EU. Both processors are unlocked multipliers, target the mobile market segment, and hold active production status. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $503. The AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP. Release dates are close, with AMD launched on 2023-12-05 and Intel on 2023-12-13.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental architectural split is between AMD's Zen 4 and Intel's Meteor Lake designs. AMD's Ryzen 5 8645HS belongs to the 8000 series, uses the Hawk Point codename, and is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The die size is 178 mm² with 25,000 million transistors. Intel's Core Ultra 7 155H is part of the Core Ultra Series 1, uses the Meteor Lake codename, and is fabricated on a 7 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The database does not record transistor count or die size for the Intel part.

The core count difference of 10 cores (16 versus 6) reflects Intel's hybrid approach in Meteor Lake, which combines different core types within the same package. AMD's Zen 4 architecture relies on a more uniform core design. The thread count difference is 10 threads as well (22 versus 12). Despite having fewer cores and threads, the AMD chip maintains competitive single-thread performance, as shown by its wins in Cinebench R15 single-core and PassMark single-thread.

Cache architecture differences align with the core configurations. Intel's larger per-core L1 (112 KB versus 64 KB) and L2 (2 MB versus 1 MB) caches, combined with a 24 MB shared L3 versus AMD's 16 MB, provide more total cache capacity. However, AMD's smaller core count means each core has access to a larger share of the shared L3 when needed.

Process node differences are notable: 4 nm at TSMC versus 7 nm at Intel. The smaller process node for AMD likely contributes to its higher clock speeds, with a 5.00 GHz boost versus Intel's 4.80 GHz. The socket specifications differ as expected: AMD Socket FP8 for the Ryzen chip, Intel BGA 2049 for the Core Ultra 7. The part numbers reflect this: AMD lists multiple part numbers (100-000001320 for FP7r2, 100-000001385 for FP7, 100-000001310 for FP8), while Intel uses a single part number, SRMZ1.

Memory bandwidth is identical at 89.6 GB/s for both, despite the architectural differences. The PCIe generation gap (Gen 4 for AMD, Gen 5 for Intel) indicates different expansion capabilities, though the lane counts differ as well (20 versus 8). Integrated graphics architectures are entirely separate, with AMD's Radeon 760M versus Intel's Arc Xe-LPG 128EU, reflecting the distinct GPU design philosophies of the two manufacturers.