AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS vs Intel Core 7 251E Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database does not contain a direct head-to-head benchmark comparison between the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS and the Intel Core 7 251E. The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, meaning no shared test scores were captured for both processors under identical conditions. Consequently, a win/loss tally cannot be derived from direct comparison data.

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS has a complete benchmark suite in the database, with 17 recorded scores. Its average benchmark score is 28478, placing it in the 80th percentile among all CPUs tracked. The Intel Core 7 251E has no recorded benchmarks in the database, yielding an average benchmark score of 0 and a 50th percentile ranking. This absence of data for the Intel part means any performance comparison must rely on the architectural and specification differences between the two, not on measured results.

For context on the AMD processor's standing, the nearest rivals in the database show a tight cluster. The Intel Xeon E-2436 averages 28530, a delta of -0.2% relative to the Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850HS averages 28549, also -0.2%. The Intel Core 5 220H averages 28574, -0.3%. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850U averages 28379, +0.3%. These deltas indicate the Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS sits within a narrow band of comparable processors, slightly below three of its nearest rivals and slightly above one, with all differences under half a percent.

Within the AMD part's own benchmark results, the strongest scores appear in PassMark multithread at 21465, PassMark integer math at 69839, and PassMark floating point math at 43019. Single-thread performance shows a PassMark single thread score of 3561. Cinebench R23 multicore reaches 18104, while Cinebench R23 singlecore hits 2555. Data compression in PassMark records 246446, and data encryption records 14962. These figures establish a baseline for what the Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS can deliver, but without corresponding Intel Core 7 251E scores, no direct numerical comparison is possible.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge sharply in their fundamental design. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS uses the Zen 4 architecture under the Hawk Point codename, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core 7 251E uses the Bartlett Lake codename on a 10 nm process at Intel. The AMD foundry is TSMC, while Intel uses its own fabrication. Transistor counts differ as well: the AMD part packs 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, whereas the Intel part lists no transistor count but has a 257 mm² die size.

Core and thread counts present a major split. The AMD processor has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel processor has 24 cores and 32 threads. Clock behavior also differs substantially. The AMD base clock is 3.50 GHz with a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The Intel base clock is 2.10 GHz with a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. The Intel part therefore starts lower but boosts significantly higher, while the AMD part maintains a higher base frequency.

Cache hierarchies are structured differently. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS offers 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The Intel Core 7 251E offers 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The Intel part has larger per-core cache allocations and more than double the shared L3 capacity.

Memory support shows a generation gap. The AMD processor supports DDR5 only, on a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel processor supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel with the same 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. Both support ECC memory. PCIe capabilities differ: AMD provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while Intel provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The Intel part has the newer PCIe generation but fewer lanes.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The AMD part uses the Radeon 760M. The Intel part uses UHD Graphics 770. Market segments also differ: the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS is classified as a mobile processor, while the Intel Core 7 251E is classified as a desktop processor. This aligns with their sockets: AMD Socket FP7 for the Ryzen, Intel Socket 1700 for the Core 7. The thermal design power reflects this split, though the TDP value itself is a specification detail covered in the specification section.

Release timing differs. The AMD part was released on 2024-04-15, while the Intel part was released on 2025-01-12. Both are listed as active in production. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. The AMD part number is 100-000001354 (FP7r2) and 100-000001382 (FP7), while the Intel part number is SRQDUQ657.

The Verdict

The database presents an incomplete picture because the Intel Core 7 251E has no recorded benchmark scores. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS has a full set of measurements and an 80th percentile ranking, while the Intel part sits at the 50th percentile with an average benchmark score of zero. On measured data alone, the AMD processor is the only one with demonstrated performance.

Architecturally, the Intel Core 7 251E offers a much higher core count (24 versus 6), more threads (32 versus 12), a higher boost clock (5.60 GHz versus 4.90 GHz), larger caches (36 MB shared L3 versus 16 MB), and newer PCIe Gen 5 support. However, these are unverified by any benchmark result in the database. The AMD part counters with a more modern 4 nm process, a higher base clock (3.50 GHz versus 2.10 GHz), and a mobile form factor with a 28 W TDP.

For workloads where measured data exists, the Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS is the only processor with confirmed performance figures. Its nearest rivals in the database all score within 0.3% of its average, indicating it performs in line with similar mid-range parts. The Intel Core 7 251E cannot be positioned on performance grounds from this database, as no scores were recorded.

The choice between them depends on whether the user prioritizes verified results or architectural headroom. The recorded data supports the AMD part. The specification sheet favors the Intel part on core count, cache, and boost frequency, but those advantages lack measured confirmation. For a desktop build targeting heavy multithreaded workloads, the Intel part's 24 cores and 32 threads are an attractive specification, yet the absence of benchmark data leaves its real-world standing unquantified. For a mobile system where power efficiency and a compact footprint matter, the AMD part has recorded scores that place it in the 80th percentile, a concrete data point the Intel part cannot match.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS | Intel Core 7 251E |

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

| Cores | 6 | 24 |

| Threads | 12 | 32 |

| Base clock | 3.50 GHz | 2.10 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.90 GHz | 5.60 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP7 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Not listed |

| Codename | Hawk Point | Bartlett Lake |

| Process node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 25,000 million | Not listed |

| Die size | 178 mm² | 257 mm² |

| 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 | 36 MB shared |

| Memory support | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 89.6 GB/s |

| 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 | 2025-01-12 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | $384 |

The two processors share dual-channel memory buses and ECC support. Both have locked multipliers. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $384; the AMD part has no listed launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core 7 251E has 24 cores versus 6 cores for the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS. The Intel part also has 32 threads versus 12.

Q: Does the AMD processor have a higher clock speed?

A: At base clock, yes. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS runs at 3.50 GHz base, while the Intel Core 7 251E runs at 2.10 GHz base. At boost, the Intel part is higher at 5.60 GHz versus 4.90 GHz.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core 7 251E has 36 MB of shared L3 cache, compared to 16 MB for the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS supports DDR5 only. The Intel Core 7 251E supports both DDR4 and DDR5. Both use dual-channel memory with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS and the Intel Core 7 251E support ECC memory.

Q: What is the market segment for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS is a mobile processor using AMD Socket FP7. The Intel Core 7 251E is a desktop processor using Intel Socket 1700.

Q: Which processor has recorded benchmark scores in the database?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS has recorded benchmark scores. The Intel Core 7 251E has an empty benchmark array, so its performance is not measured in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS wins on verified performance data. Its average benchmark score of 28478 places it in the 80th percentile of all CPUs, with a complete set of Cinebench and PassMark results. It also wins on process technology, using a 4 nm TSMC node versus Intel's 10 nm process, which typically indicates better power efficiency for the same workload. Its mobile classification and 28 W TDP make it suited to laptops and compact systems. The higher base clock of 3.50 GHz suggests stronger sustained performance at lower power draw in short bursts. Its Radeon 760M integrated graphics and PCIe Gen 4 support round out a mobile-focused feature set.

The Intel Core 7 251E wins on raw specification counts. The 24-core, 32-thread configuration dwarfs the AMD part's 6 cores and 12 threads, which points toward much higher multithreaded capacity if the silicon delivers as specified. The 5.60 GHz boost clock is the highest between the two, and the 36 MB shared L3 cache is more than double the AMD part's 16 MB. The Intel part also supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, offering more flexibility in platform memory selection. Its PCIe Gen 5 interface with 16 lanes provides newer connectivity standards. The 257 mm² die size and desktop socket 1700 indicate a larger, higher-power part aimed at desktop builds. The launch MSRP of $384 positions it as a desktop processor with a defined price point, though the database does not record benchmarks to confirm its performance tier.