AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS vs Intel Core 9 273PQE Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS and Intel Core 9 273PQE are fundamentally different processors, and the benchmark data reflects a decisive performance gap. The Intel part wins every single recorded benchmark, 17 out of 17, with the AMD processor trailing by margins ranging from roughly 22% to over 65%. The average benchmark scores confirm this chasm: the Intel Core 9 273PQE posts an average score of 66,099, while the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS averages 28,478. The Intel processor also sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 80th percentile for the AMD chip. This is not a close contest; it is a demonstration of two processors built for entirely different purposes.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core 9 273PQE dominates the Cinebench suite, with the smallest margin being a 53.8% advantage. In Cinebench R15 multicore, Intel scores 3,950 against AMD’s 1,824. The single-core R15 test shows a similar pattern: 557 versus 257. Moving to R20, Intel scores 16,459 in multicore and 2,323 in single-core, while AMD scores 7,603 and 1,073 respectively. The R23 results follow the same script: Intel delivers 39,190 in multicore and 5,532 in single-core, while AMD manages 18,104 and 2,555. The consistency of the 53.8% delta across all six Cinebench tests suggests the gap is structural rather than workload-specific.

PassMark results show more variance. The largest Intel advantage comes in floating-point math, where Intel scores 125,546 against AMD’s 43,019, a 65.7% gap. Prime number finding shows a 64.1% difference, with Intel at 198 and AMD at 71. Physics simulation also favors Intel heavily: 2,754 versus 1,043, a 62.1% delta. Data compression shows a 57.9% gap (585,752 versus 246,446), and integer math is 57.6% apart (164,629 versus 69,839). Data encryption is closer at 49.5% (29,636 versus 14,962), while extended instructions sit at 52.2% (38,743 versus 18,507). Random string sorting is the closest PassMark result besides single-thread, with Intel leading 53,167 to 30,235, a 43.1% delta.

The single-threaded PassMark test reveals the narrowest overall margin. Intel scores 4,573 against AMD’s 3,561, a 22.1% advantage. This is still a substantial lead, but it is notably smaller than the multi-threaded gaps. The data suggests that while Intel’s per-core performance is strong, the AMD chip’s Zen 4 architecture helps it close some of the distance in lightly threaded scenarios. The multi-thread PassMark score shows Intel at 46,107 versus AMD’s 21,465, a 53.4% gap. The Intel processor also outperforms the AMD chip in every memory-adjacent and I/O-sensitive workload recorded, including data compression and random string sorting.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies and manufacturing processes. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, with 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The Intel Core 9 273PQE uses a 10 nm process from Intel’s own foundry. This process difference is significant: the AMD chip packs more transistors onto a smaller die, while the Intel part uses a larger, less dense process node.

The core configurations differ sharply. The AMD processor has 6 cores and 12 threads, based on the Zen 4 architecture with the Hawk Point codename. The Intel processor has 12 cores and 24 threads, using the Bartlett Lake codename. That is exactly double the core count and double the thread count. The cache hierarchy also differs. AMD provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. Intel provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The Intel part has more than double the L3 cache, which helps explain its strong performance in data-heavy workloads like compression and encryption.

Clock speeds tell a nuanced story. The AMD base clock is 3.50 GHz with a boost of 4.90 GHz. The Intel base clock is slightly lower at 3.40 GHz, but its boost reaches 5.90 GHz. The higher boost clock gives Intel a clear advantage in bursty, single-threaded tasks. The thermal design power differs dramatically: AMD is rated at 28 watts, while Intel is rated at 125 watts. The Intel part consumes significantly more power to achieve its performance, which is expected given its desktop market segment. The AMD chip is a mobile processor, while the Intel chip is a desktop part.

Memory support also differs. AMD supports DDR5 only, with dual-channel memory and 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel with the same 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. Both support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity differs: AMD provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes, while Intel provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes. The integrated graphics differ as well: AMD uses the Radeon 760M, while Intel uses the UHD Graphics 770. The AMD processor fits the AMD Socket FP7, while Intel uses Socket 1700.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 9 273PQE wins every recorded benchmark, so the analysis is about the degree of dominance rather than which side takes any victories. In multi-threaded workloads, the Intel part is overwhelming. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 39,190 versus 18,104 shows a 53.8% advantage, and the PassMark multithread score of 46,107 versus 21,465 confirms the pattern. The Intel processor’s 12 cores and 24 threads give it a structural edge in parallel workloads such as video rendering, scientific simulation, and heavy compilation tasks.

The Intel part also wins in single-threaded performance, but the margin is smaller. The PassMark single-thread score of 4,573 versus 3,561 is a 22.1% gap, while the Cinebench R23 single-core score shows a 53.8% gap at 5,532 versus 2,555. The Cinebench single-core results indicate that the Intel boost clock of 5.90 GHz provides a meaningful advantage in latency-sensitive tasks. The AMD chip’s 4.90 GHz boost is not enough to close that gap.

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS does not win any benchmark, but its profile suggests it is optimized for efficiency rather than raw throughput. With a 28 watt TDP, it is designed for mobile systems where power draw is a constraint. The Intel part, at 125 watts, is a desktop processor that can sustain higher performance at the cost of power. The AMD chip’s smaller process node, 4 nm versus 10 nm, and its transistor density (25,000 million on 178 mm²) indicate a focus on power efficiency. The Intel part, with no listed transistor count or die size, appears less concerned with density.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the Intel Core 9 273PQE in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The Intel processor scores 39,190, while the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS scores 18,104. The delta is 53.8% in favor of Intel.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE boosts to 5.90 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS boosts to 4.90 GHz. The Intel base clock is 3.40 GHz, compared to AMD’s 3.50 GHz.

Q: What is the difference in core and thread counts?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE has 12 cores and 24 threads. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS has 6 cores and 12 threads. Intel has double the cores and double the threads.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS and the Intel Core 9 273PQE support ECC memory. Both also use dual-channel memory with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What is the market segment for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS is a mobile processor. The Intel Core 9 273PQE is a desktop processor.

Q: How does the Intel processor compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE has an average benchmark score of 66,099. Its nearest rival is the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus with an average score of 66,159, a delta of 0.1% in favor of the rival. The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D scores 65,914, which is 0.3% behind the Intel Core 9 273PQE.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core 9 273PQE outperforms the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS in every recorded test. The Intel part is the choice for anyone who needs maximum throughput, whether in multi-threaded rendering, floating-point math, or data encryption. Its 12 cores, 24 threads, 36 MB of L3 cache, and 5.90 GHz boost clock deliver results that the AMD chip cannot match. The Intel processor’s 93rd percentile ranking, against AMD’s 80th, reinforces this conclusion.

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS is not without merit, but its strengths lie outside the recorded benchmarks. Its 28 watt TDP and 4 nm process node make it a power-efficient mobile option. It is a capable processor for laptops where battery life and thermal limits matter more than raw performance. The data shows it is competitive in single-threaded PassMark workloads, with only a 22.1% gap, which is its best relative result. However, in every multi-threaded test, the Intel part is more than 50% ahead.

The choice depends on the use case. For desktop computing where power draw is not a constraint, the Intel Core 9 273PQE is the clear winner based on the data. For mobile computing where efficiency is paramount, the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS offers a much lower power envelope. The Intel processor also carries a launch MSRP of $589, which is a relevant consideration for desktop builds, though the AMD chip has no listed launch MSRP.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS | Intel Core 9 273PQE |

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

| Cores | 6 | 12 |

| Threads | 12 | 24 |

| Base Clock | 3.50 GHz | 3.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.90 GHz | 5.90 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 125 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 | Not listed |

| 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 Bus | Dual-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 89.6 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | Yes |

| 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 | Not listed | $589 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | No |

| Part Number | 100-000001354 (FP7r2), 100-000001382 (FP7) | SA4Q9 |

| Percentile vs All CPUs | 80 | 93 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 28,478 | 66,099 |