AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS vs Intel Core i5-13490F Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS and the Intel Core i5-13490F occupy different corners of the processor market, yet benchmark results place them in the same performance percentile. Both chips sit at the 80th percentile among all CPUs, but their average benchmark scores diverge slightly: the AMD part averages 28,478 points, while the Intel part averages 28,185 points. This 1% difference in aggregate scores masks a far more lopsided head-to-head comparison, where the Intel desktop part wins all 17 shared benchmark tests. The data reveals a clear performance hierarchy, though the context of each chip’s intended segment—mobile versus desktop—explains much of the gap.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core i5-13490F dominates every single shared benchmark, but the margins vary dramatically by workload. In Cinebench tests, the Intel part’s advantage is remarkably uniform: across R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core scores show a consistent -20.4% delta for the AMD chip. For example, in Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel scores 22,747 against the AMD’s 18,104, a gap of 4,643 points. Single-core R23 tells the same story: 3,211 versus 2,555. This uniformity suggests a fundamental throughput advantage rather than workload-specific optimization.

The largest discrepancy appears in PassMark’s physics test, where the Intel part scores 1,915 against the AMD’s 1,043, a 45.5% deficit for the Ryzen. This test often reflects raw core count and scheduling efficiency, and the Intel’s 10-core configuration clearly excels here. Prime number finding shows a 37.7% gap (114 versus 71), while floating-point math trails by 28.6% (60,273 versus 43,019). These are substantial margins that indicate the Intel chip’s higher core count and desktop power envelope translate directly into compute-heavy wins.

The narrowest gap is in PassMark single-thread performance, where the Intel leads by only 7% (3,828 versus 3,561). This is notable because it suggests the AMD’s Zen 4 architecture is competitive on a per-thread basis, despite the overall loss. Data compression shows a 25% deficit (328,397 versus 246,446), while integer math trails by 16.6% (83,723 versus 69,839). Encryption and extended instructions both show roughly 11-16% gaps (17,902 versus 14,962 and 20,837 versus 18,507, respectively). The pattern is consistent: the Intel part wins everywhere, but the AMD chip’s single-core prowess keeps the smaller margins respectable.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS is built on TSMC’s 4 nm process, while the Intel Core i5-13490F uses Intel’s 10 nm node. This process advantage is reflected in the AMD’s power efficiency: its TDP is 28 watts compared to the Intel’s 65 watts, a more than 2x difference. The AMD chip’s die size is 178 mm² with 25,000 million transistors, whereas the Intel die is larger at 215 mm² with no transistor count listed. The AMD’s smaller, denser process allows for a mobile-oriented design.

Core configurations diverge sharply. The AMD packs 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel offers 10 cores and 16 threads. This 4-core, 4-thread advantage explains much of the multi-core benchmark gap. Cache hierarchies also differ: the AMD provides 64 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 per core, with 16 MB shared L3. The Intel provides 80 KB L1 and 1.25 MB L2 per core, with a larger 24 MB shared L3. The Intel’s larger L3 cache gives it more headroom for data-heavy workloads.

Memory support presents another split. The AMD supports only DDR5, while the Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the AMD lists a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the Intel’s bandwidth is not specified. The AMD also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the Intel. PCIe connectivity differs as well: the AMD offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes, while the Intel offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes. The Intel’s newer PCIe standard provides higher per-lane bandwidth, though the AMD has more total lanes.

The AMD integrates a Radeon 760M GPU, while the Intel has no integrated graphics—a key differentiator for systems without a discrete GPU. The AMD uses AMD Socket FP7, the Intel uses Intel Socket 1700. The AMD’s architecture is Zen 4 (Hawk Point), released in April 2024; the Intel’s is Raptor Lake (Raptor Lake-S), released in February 2023. The AMD’s part number is 100-000001354(FP7r2) or 100-000001382(FP7), while the Intel’s is SRMC0. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 28,478, compared to the Intel Core i5-13490F’s 28,185. However, this difference of 293 points (about 1%) is within the margin of error for the nearest rival comparisons.

Q: How do the two chips compare in single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i5-13490F wins all single-core tests. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 3,211 versus the AMD’s 2,555, a 20.4% lead. In PassMark single-thread, the Intel leads by a narrower 7% margin (3,828 versus 3,561), indicating the AMD’s per-thread efficiency is competitive.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark physics, where the Intel leads by 45.5% (1,915 versus 1,043). This is followed by prime number finding at 37.7% (114 versus 71) and floating-point math at 28.6% (60,273 versus 43,019).

Q: Does the AMD processor have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS integrates a Radeon 760M GPU. The Intel Core i5-13490F has no integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU for display output.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i5-13490F does not list ECC support in its specifications.

Q: What is the release date difference between the two?

A: The Intel Core i5-13490F was released on 2023-02-09, while the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS was released on 2024-04-15, making the AMD about 14 months newer.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS | Intel Core i5-13490F |

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

| Cores | 6 | 10 |

| Threads | 12 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 3.50 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.90 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP7 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Raptor Lake |

| Codename | Hawk Point | Raptor Lake-S |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die Size | 178 mm² | 215 mm² |

| Transistors | 25,000 million | Not listed |

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

| L2 Cache (per core) | 1 MB | 1.25 MB |

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

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | Not listed |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes | Gen 5, 16 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 760M | None |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2024-04-15 | 2023-02-09 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | $235 |

| Part Number | 100-000001354(FP7r2), 100-000001382(FP7) | SRMC0 |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-13490F wins every head-to-head benchmark in the dataset, making it the clear choice for raw performance. Its 10-core, 16-thread configuration delivers decisive multi-core victories, particularly in Cinebench R23 multi-core (22,747 versus 18,104) and PassMark multithread (26,569 versus 21,465). For workloads that scale with core count—rendering, video encoding, scientific computation—the Intel part is superior. The 45.5% physics test advantage and 37.7% prime number lead further cement its position for compute-intensive tasks. The Intel also wins in single-core performance, though its 7% PassMark single-thread lead suggests the gap is narrower for lightly threaded applications.

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS wins where specifications matter beyond raw scores. Its 28-watt TDP versus the Intel’s 65-watt TDP makes it far more suitable for mobile systems where power efficiency is critical. The integrated Radeon 760M GPU provides a complete platform without needing a discrete graphics card, which is essential for thin-and-light laptops. ECC memory support adds reliability for professional workloads. The AMD’s 4.90 GHz boost clock slightly exceeds the Intel’s 4.80 GHz, and its 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes offer more total connectivity than the Intel’s 16 Gen 5 lanes. The newer 4 nm process and later release date suggest a more modern platform.

For use cases, the Intel Core i5-13490F is the choice for desktop builds prioritizing maximum throughput, especially in multi-threaded applications. Its larger 24 MB L3 cache and higher core count give it a distinct advantage in data-heavy and parallel workloads. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS is the choice for portable systems that need balanced performance with integrated graphics, lower power consumption, and ECC support. In the nearest rival context, the AMD sits close to the Intel Xeon E-2436 (0.2% below) and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850HS (0.2% below), while the Intel sits near the AMD Ryzen AI 5 435 (0.2% above) and the Intel Core i5-14500T (0.4% above). Both chips are evenly matched in overall percentile, but the Intel’s benchmark sweep makes it the performance winner, while the AMD wins on platform features and efficiency.