AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS vs Intel Core Ultra 5 135H Comparison

Intel Core Ultra 5 135H and AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS are both 28-watt mobile processors, but they approach performance from opposite design philosophies. The Intel part uses a 14-core hybrid layout, while the AMD chip relies on six full Zen 4 cores. The recorded data shows a near-even split in head-to-head wins: the Intel processor takes 9 benchmarks, and the AMD processor takes 8. This makes the choice highly workload-dependent, with the deciding factor being whether the task favors raw multi-threaded throughput or single-core efficiency.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic separation in the database occurs in the Cinebench R23 tests, where the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS delivers a decisive victory. In the multi-core run, the AMD scores 18104 against the Intel's 11875.5, a margin of 34.4%. The single-core R23 result is equally one-sided, with the AMD at 2555 versus the Intel at 1700, a 33.5% lead. These are the largest deltas recorded between the two processors, indicating that the AMD's Zen 4 cores are substantially more efficient per thread when pushed to sustained loads.

The older Cinebench R15 tests tell a different story, though the winner remains the same. In R15 multi-core, the AMD scores 1824 against the Intel's 1718, a 5.8% advantage. The R15 single-core result shows the AMD at 257 versus 244, a 5.1% lead. This pattern suggests that while the AMD wins across all Cinebench versions, the gap widens significantly in the newer R23 workload, which is more demanding and better at exposing sustained boost behavior.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H fights back in the PassMark suite, where it secures 9 of the 17 total benchmark wins. Its largest victory comes in PassMark physics, where it scores 1482 against the AMD's 1043, a 42.1% advantage. The Intel part also dominates in floating-point math, scoring 54867 versus 43019, a 27.5% lead. In prime number finding, the Intel scores 89 against the AMD's 71, a 25.4% margin. These three results show that the Intel hybrid architecture, with its mix of performance and efficiency cores, excels in specific computational patterns that the PassMark suite measures.

The remaining PassMark tests are closer. The Intel wins integer math with 73509 versus 69839, a 5.3% edge, and multithread with 22422 versus 21465, a 4.5% lead. Data compression goes to the Intel at 251651 versus 246446, a 2.1% margin, and data encryption is nearly tied at 15026 versus 14962, a 0.4% edge for Intel. The AMD wins extended instructions with 18507 versus 15028, an 18.8% margin, and random string sorting with 30235 versus 28980, a 4.2% lead. Single-thread performance is essentially a tie, with the AMD at 3561 and the Intel at 3521, a 1.1% difference.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS is the clear choice for sustained multi-core rendering and single-core intensive tasks. Its Cinebench R23 results, both multi-core and single-core, are far ahead of the Intel part. The 34.4% advantage in R23 multi-core indicates that for video rendering, 3D modeling, or any workload that scales across threads over a long period, the AMD will finish substantially faster. The 33.5% lead in R23 single-core also makes it the better option for legacy software, spreadsheet calculations, or applications that rely on one primary thread.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H wins in the PassMark physics test by 42.1%, which is a strong indicator for physics simulations in gaming or scientific computing. Its 27.5% lead in floating-point math makes it suitable for financial modeling, signal processing, or any task heavy on transcendental functions. The 25.4% advantage in prime number finding suggests an edge in cryptography-related workloads or algorithmic number theory. The Intel also edges out the AMD in integer math and general multithread performance, though by smaller margins of 5.3% and 4.5% respectively.

For data compression, the Intel part holds a 2.1% lead, which is narrow but consistent. The AMD wins random string sorting by 4.2%, indicating a slight advantage in sorting algorithms and text processing. Data encryption is effectively a tie, with the Intel holding just a 0.4% lead. Extended instruction workloads, such as AVX-512 or similar vector operations, favor the AMD by 18.8%, making it the better choice for scientific computing or media encoding that uses those instruction sets.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H is built on Meteor Lake architecture using a 7 nm process at Intel's foundry. It packs 14 cores and 18 threads, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The integrated graphics are Arc Xe-LPG with 96 execution units. Memory support is DDR5, dual-channel, with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, and it does not support ECC memory. The PCIe interface is Gen 5 with 8 lanes, and the socket is Intel BGA 2049.

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS uses Zen 4 architecture on a 4 nm process from TSMC. It has 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The transistor count is 25,000 million on a 178 mm² die. The cache is smaller per core: 64 KB of L1, 1 MB of L2, and 16 MB of shared L3. The integrated graphics are Radeon 760M. It supports DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode with the same 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, but it does support ECC memory. The PCIe interface is Gen 4 with 20 lanes, and the socket is AMD Socket FP7.

The process node difference is notable, with the AMD using a 4 nm process versus the Intel's 7 nm. The AMD has a higher boost clock at 4.90 GHz versus 4.60 GHz, but the Intel has more than double the core count. The Intel's cache structure dedicates more L1 and L2 per core, which may explain its wins in physics and floating-point math. The AMD's larger L3, though smaller in total at 16 MB versus 18 MB, is unified across fewer cores, making it more accessible. The AMD supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the Intel. The PCIe generation differs, with the Intel on Gen 5 and the AMD on Gen 4, though the AMD offers more lanes at 20 versus 8.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core clock speed?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS has a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 135H boosts to 4.60 GHz. This aligns with the AMD's 1.1% lead in PassMark single-thread and its 33.5% advantage in Cinebench R23 single-core.

Q: Does the AMD processor support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H does not list ECC memory support in its specifications.

Q: How do the two processors compare in data compression?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H wins in PassMark data compression with a score of 251651 against the AMD's 246446, a 2.1% margin. This is one of the Intel's smaller wins, but it is a consistent advantage.

Q: Which processor has more PCIe lanes?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS provides 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, whereas the Intel Core Ultra 5 135H provides 8 PCIe Gen 5 lanes. The AMD offers more lanes for expansion, but the Intel uses a newer PCIe generation.

Q: What is the transistor count difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS has 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H does not have a transistor count listed in the database.

Q: Which processor scores higher in Cinebench R20 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H wins in Cinebench R20 multi-core with a score of 7834 against the AMD's 7603, a 3% advantage. This is one of the few multi-core tests where the Intel leads.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split. For users running Cinebench R23 or similar modern rendering workloads, the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS is the superior choice with a 34.4% multi-core lead and a 33.5% single-core lead. The AMD also wins extended instruction tasks by 18.8% and random string sorting by 4.2%. Its 4 nm process, 4.90 GHz boost clock, and ECC memory support make it a strong candidate for professional workstations where rendering and numerical precision are paramount.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H is the better pick for physics simulations and floating-point heavy tasks, where it leads by 42.1% and 27.5% respectively. It also wins in prime number finding, integer math, multithread, data compression, and data encryption. Its 14 cores and 18 threads provide a wider base for concurrent tasks, and the 8 PCIe Gen 5 lanes offer higher bandwidth per lane for compatible devices. The Intel part is the more versatile all-rounder, winning 9 benchmarks to the AMD's 8, but its losses in the Cinebench suite are large enough to matter for rendering-centric users.

The overall benchmark averages are close, with the Intel at 29093 and the AMD at 28478, a difference of roughly 2%. The Intel sits at the 81st percentile of all CPUs, while the AMD sits at the 80th. The choice hinges on the specific workload: pick the AMD for maximum rendering speed and single-core efficiency, pick the Intel for physics, floating-point, and general multi-threaded complexity.