AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS vs Intel Core i5-12600H Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data splits this comparison into two clear profiles. The Intel Core i5-12600H wins 11 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, while the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS takes 6. The Intel part dominates Cinebench across the board, with a consistent 10.9 percent advantage in R15, R20, and R23 multicore tests, and matching single-core leads in R15 and R23. For users whose workloads are heavily threaded and render-centric, the i5-12600H is the stronger choice. The AMD chip, however, counters with notable wins in extended instruction throughput, random string sorting, and single-thread PassMark scores, making it the better option for mixed productivity and code-execution tasks that leverage modern instruction sets. The AMD part also operates at a 28 W TDP versus the Intel's 45 W, which suggests a thermal-efficiency advantage for thin-and-light chassis, though the database does not include direct power measurements. In short, pick the Intel for Cinebench-class rendering workloads, pick the AMD for encryption, extended instructions, and single-thread PassMark performance, and weigh the TDP difference if battery life or cooling headroom matters.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Core i5-12600H uses Alder Lake architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process, with a die size of 217 mm². It is a hybrid design, implementing 12 cores and 16 threads, which implies a mix of performance and efficiency cores, though the database does not specify the exact core configuration. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS uses Zen 4 architecture, branded as Hawk Point, fabricated by TSMC on a 4 nm process with 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The AMD chip has 6 cores and 12 threads, a uniform design without hybrid core types.

Cache hierarchies differ in both capacity and allocation. The Intel part has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The AMD part has 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3. The Intel chip therefore has a larger total cache footprint across all levels, which contributes to its lead in several memory-sensitive workloads. The AMD chip counters with a higher base clock of 3.50 GHz and a higher boost clock of 4.90 GHz, versus the Intel's 2.70 GHz base and 4.50 GHz boost. The AMD part also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the Intel. Both support PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU. Memory support differs: the Intel accepts both DDR4 and DDR5, while the AMD supports DDR5 only, with a rated memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The integrated graphics also differ, with Intel's Iris Xe 80EU versus AMD's Radeon 760M, though no graphics benchmark data is recorded in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results are the most striking pattern. In R15 multicore, the Intel scores 2023 against the AMD's 1824, a 10.9 percent lead. The same margin appears in R15 single-core, with 285 versus 257. R20 multicore shows 8430 versus 7603, again 10.9 percent. R20 single-core is 1189 versus 1073, a 10.8 percent edge. R23 multicore is 20072 versus 18104, 10.9 percent, and R23 single-core is 2833 versus 2555, also 10.9 percent. These are not isolated wins; the Intel advantage is uniform across every Cinebench test, suggesting a consistent architectural edge in this workload family.

PassMark results tell a more mixed story. In floating-point math, the Intel wins decisively with 51264 versus 43019, a 19.2 percent margin. Physics also favors Intel, with 1262 versus 1043, a 21 percent lead. Integer math is close, 71168 versus 69839, a 1.9 percent Intel edge. Data compression is nearly a tie, 247404 versus 246446, with Intel ahead by only 0.4 percent. Find prime numbers is a dead heat at 71 for both. The AMD takes the remaining categories. Data encryption goes to AMD, 14962 versus 14799, a 1.1 percent margin. Extended instructions is the largest AMD win: 18507 versus 14508, or 21.6 percent in AMD's favor. Random string sorting favors AMD, 30235 versus 27653, an 8.5 percent lead. PassMark multithread goes to AMD, 21465 versus 21128, a 1.6 percent edge. Both single-thread PassMark entries, recorded twice in the database, show AMD at 3561 versus Intel's 3453, a 3 percent advantage.

The overall benchmark averages reflect this split. The Intel part has an average benchmark score of 28882, placing it in the 81st percentile of all CPUs. The AMD part averages 28478, in the 80th percentile. The Intel's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-13900H at 28886 (0 percent delta), the AMD Ryzen 5 5600XT at 28940 (-0.2 percent), the Intel Core i7-12650H at 28815 (0.2 percent), and the Intel Core Ultra 5 135H at 29093 (-0.7 percent). The AMD's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon E-2436 at 28530 (-0.2 percent), the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850HS at 28549 (-0.2 percent), the Intel Core 5 220H at 28574 (-0.3 percent), and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850U at 28379 (0.3 percent). These deltas are all within a fraction of a percent, indicating that both parts sit in a dense performance cluster where small differences in workload mix can flip the ranking.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across several key specification fields. The Intel has 12 cores and 16 threads, while the AMD has 6 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks are 2.70 GHz for Intel and 3.50 GHz for AMD. Boost clocks are 4.50 GHz and 4.90 GHz, respectively. TDP is 45 W for Intel and 28 W for AMD. The Intel uses socket Intel BGA 1744, the AMD uses AMD Socket FP7. Process nodes are 10 nm for Intel and 4 nm for AMD, with the AMD die smaller at 178 mm² versus 217 mm². The AMD die packs 25,000 million transistors; the Intel transistor count is not recorded. L1 cache is 80 KB per core on Intel versus 64 KB per core on AMD. L2 cache is 1.25 MB per core versus 1 MB per core. L3 cache is 18 MB shared versus 16 MB shared. Memory support is DDR4 and DDR5 for Intel, DDR5 only for AMD. The AMD supports ECC memory, the Intel does not. Memory bandwidth is recorded only for the AMD at 89.6 GB/s. Integrated graphics differ: Iris Xe 80EU versus Radeon 760M. The AMD has a recorded release date of 2024-04-15, while the Intel release date is not in the database. Both parts are mobile segments, both are active production, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the majority of benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core i5-12600H wins 11 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, while the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS wins 6. The Intel part also has a slightly higher average benchmark score, 28882 versus 28478, and a higher percentile ranking, 81 versus 80.

Q: How large is the Intel lead in Cinebench multicore tests?

A: The Intel leads by 10.9 percent in Cinebench R15 multicore (2023 versus 1824), R20 multicore (8430 versus 7603), and R23 multicore (20072 versus 18104). The margin is identical across all three tests.

Q: Where does the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS perform best?

A: The AMD chip wins in data encryption (14962 versus 14799, a 1.1 percent margin), extended instructions (18507 versus 14508, a 21.6 percent margin), random string sorting (30235 versus 27653, an 8.5 percent margin), PassMark multithread (21465 versus 21128, a 1.6 percent margin), and single-thread PassMark (3561 versus 3453, a 3 percent margin).

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

A: The Intel Core i5-12600H has 12 cores and 16 threads. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS has 6 cores and 12 threads. Despite having fewer cores, the AMD chip still wins several multithreaded PassMark tests, including the multithread aggregate.

Q: Do the two processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The Intel part supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The AMD part supports DDR5 only, also dual-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel memory bandwidth is not recorded in the database.

Q: Which processor offers ECC memory support?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i5-12600H does not. This makes the AMD part more suitable for error-sensitive workloads, though the database does not include ECC-specific performance tests.