AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS vs Intel Core 5 223PQE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data does not contain a direct head-to-head benchmark comparison between the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS and the Intel Core 5 223PQE. The head-to-head benchmark table is empty, and neither processor has win counts assigned. However, the database includes a full benchmark suite for the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS, while the Intel Core 5 223PQE has no benchmark scores recorded. This means the quantitative comparison must rely on the AMD part’s measured results and the Intel part’s specification-level data.

For the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS, the strongest multi-threaded results come from Cinebench R23, where it scores 18104 in multi-core and 2555 in single-core. In Cinebench R20, the multi-core score is 7603 and single-core is 1073. Cinebench R15 shows 1824 multi-core and 257 single-core. These scores place the AMD processor in the 80th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 28478.

The Passmark suite for the AMD part shows a multithread score of 21465 and a single-thread score of 3561. Integer math reaches 69839, floating-point math reaches 43019, and extended instructions score 18507. Data compression scores 246446, data encryption scores 14962, and random string sorting scores 30235. Physics simulation scores 1043, and prime number finding scores 71.

Because the Intel Core 5 223PQE has no recorded benchmarks, the head-to-head comparison cannot show direct wins for either side in any measured test. The database lists the Intel part’s average benchmark score as 0 and its percentile as 50, which reflects the absence of data rather than a performance level. The AMD part’s nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon E-2436, which has an average score of 28530 and a delta of -0.2 percent relative to the AMD part, and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850HS at 28549 with a delta of -0.2 percent. The Intel Core 5 220H scores 28574 with a delta of -0.3 percent, and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850U scores 28379 with a delta of 0.3 percent. These deltas show the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS sits within a narrow band of similar-scoring CPUs, with the closest rivals being within 0.3 percent either way.

The Intel Core 5 223PQE’s specifications indicate it has more cores and threads, a higher base and boost clock, and a larger cache, but without benchmark scores, the database cannot confirm whether these translate into measured wins. The AMD part’s measured results, however, provide a concrete baseline: its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 18104 and single-core score of 2555 are the highest among the recorded Cinebench tests, suggesting strong performance for its 6-core, 12-thread configuration.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS uses the Zen 4 architecture with the Hawk Point codename, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It contains 25,000 million transistors on a die size of 178 mm². The Intel Core 5 223PQE uses the Bartlett Lake codename, built on a 10 nm process at Intel, with no transistor count or die size recorded in the database.

The AMD part features 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The Intel part features 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 4.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. The AMD part has a thermal design power of 28 watts, while the Intel part has a thermal design power of 125 watts. This is a substantial difference in power envelope, with the AMD part designed for mobile use and the Intel part for desktop use.

Cache layouts differ significantly. The AMD part has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part’s larger per-core L2 and shared L3 provide more on-die storage, though the AMD part’s smaller die and lower power draw reflect a different design target.

Memory support differs in terms of generations. The AMD part supports only DDR5 memory, while the Intel part supports both DDR4 and DDR5. Both use a dual-channel memory bus with a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. Both support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity differs: the AMD part uses Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The AMD part’s integrated graphics is Radeon 760M, while the Intel part uses UHD Graphics 770.

The AMD part belongs to the 8000 series with the Ryzen 5 PRO branding, and its generation is listed as Ryzen 5 (Zen 4 (Hawk Point)). The Intel part’s generation is listed as Core 5 (Bartlett Lake). The AMD part has a market segment of Mobile, while the Intel part has a market segment of Desktop. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP7, while the Intel part uses Intel Socket 1700.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 5 223PQE has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What is the difference in thermal design power between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS has a TDP of 28 watts, while the Intel Core 5 223PQE has a TDP of 125 watts.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS and the Intel Core 5 223PQE support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor supports DDR4 memory?

A: Only the Intel Core 5 223PQE supports DDR4 memory; the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS supports only DDR5.

Q: What is the process node for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS uses a 4 nm process at TSMC, while the Intel Core 5 223PQE uses a 10 nm process at Intel.

Q: Does the database contain benchmark scores for the Intel Core 5 223PQE?

A: No, the database has no benchmark scores for the Intel Core 5 223PQE; its average benchmark score is listed as 0.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS | Intel Core 5 223PQE |

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

| Manufacturer | AMD | Intel |

| Series | 8000 series | None recorded |

| Cores | 6 | 8 |

| Threads | 12 | 16 |

| Base clock | 3.50 GHz | 4.00 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.90 GHz | 5.50 GHz |

| TDP | 28 watts | 125 watts |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP7 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | None recorded |

| Codename | Hawk Point | Bartlett Lake |

| Generation | Ryzen 5 (Zen 4 (Hawk Point)) | Core 5 (Bartlett Lake) |

| Process node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 25,000 million | None recorded |

| Die size | 178 mm² | None recorded |

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

| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 16 MB (shared) | 24 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon 760M | UHD Graphics 770 |

| Market segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release date | 2024-04-15 | 2026-03-08 |

| Launch MSRP | None recorded | $319 |

| Part number | 100-000001354 (FP7r2), 100-000001382 (FP7) | SA4QC |

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS wins in power efficiency and mobile suitability. Its 28-watt TDP is dramatically lower than the Intel part’s 125-watt TDP, and its mobile market segment with AMD Socket FP7 confirms a design for laptops and compact systems. The database shows it has measured performance in the 80th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 28478. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 18104 and single-core score of 2555 provide a concrete performance baseline. The AMD part also uses a smaller 4 nm process node and a smaller die size of 178 mm², which supports lower power consumption. Its Radeon 760M integrated graphics adds a capable GPU on the same package.

The Intel Core 5 223PQE wins on raw specification headroom. It offers more cores (8 vs 6), more threads (16 vs 12), higher base and boost clocks (4.00 GHz and 5.50 GHz vs 3.50 GHz and 4.90 GHz), and larger caches at every level (80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, 24 MB shared L3). Its desktop market segment and Intel Socket 1700 target high-power, stationary systems where the 125-watt TDP is acceptable. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, which provides broader compatibility with existing platforms. Its PCIe Gen 5 interface with 16 lanes offers a newer generation of connectivity for expansion cards and storage. The database records no benchmark scores for the Intel part, so its measured performance cannot be confirmed, but its specification sheet indicates a design aimed at higher sustained workloads.

The division is clear: the AMD part wins in efficiency, portability, and verified benchmark performance, while the Intel part wins in core count, clock speed, cache capacity, memory flexibility, and PCIe generation. The AMD part’s measured scores place it among the top 80 percent of all CPUs, with nearest rivals like the Intel Xeon E-2436 and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850HS within 0.3 percent, showing it competes favorably in its class. The Intel part’s lack of benchmark data means its specification advantages remain unconfirmed in actual tests.