AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS vs Intel Core 7 240H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head comparison between the Intel Core 7 240H and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS reveals a clear split: Intel dominates rendering and physics workloads, while AMD takes the lead in data processing and encryption tasks. The Intel Core 7 240H wins 10 of the 15 recorded benchmarks, while the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS wins 5.

The largest margin in the entire comparison belongs to the Intel Core 7 240H in passmark find prime numbers, where it scores 102 against AMD's 56, a staggering 82.1% advantage. This is a workload that heavily favors Intel's architecture, and the gap is so wide that it suggests fundamental differences in how each processor handles integer-heavy iterative calculations. Similarly, in passmark physics, Intel scores 1723 versus AMD's 1009, a 70.8% lead. Physics simulations often scale with raw core count and memory bandwidth, and here Intel's hybrid configuration appears to pay off handsomely.

In the Cinebench suite, Intel's dominance continues. In Cinebench R23 multicore, Intel scores 15764 against AMD's 11992, a 31.5% advantage. The single-core test in R23 shows Intel ahead by 18.1%, scoring 1719 versus 1455. Cinebench R15 multicore results follow the same pattern: Intel scores 2360, AMD scores 1987, a 18.8% lead. The R15 single-core test is closer, with Intel at 249 and AMD at 234, a 6.4% margin. These results indicate that Intel's boost clock of 5.20 GHz, compared to AMD's 4.70 GHz, provides a meaningful advantage in lightly threaded workloads, while the 10-core, 16-thread configuration gives Intel the edge in fully threaded rendering tasks.

Floating-point math also favors Intel. The passmark floating point math test shows Intel scoring 58905 against AMD's 47533, a 23.9% lead. This aligns with the Cinebench results, as rendering and scientific computing rely heavily on floating-point throughput. The passmark multithread test shows a narrower Intel advantage: 23975 versus 22801, a 5.1% lead. This test is a more general measure of parallel performance, and while Intel still wins, the margin is much smaller than in Cinebench or physics.

The passmark single thread test gives Intel a score of 3782 versus AMD's 3184, a 18.8% lead. This is consistent with the Cinebench single-core results and reinforces that Intel has the stronger single-threaded performance profile.

AMD's wins are concentrated in data-centric workloads. The largest AMD victory comes in passmark data encryption, where AMD scores 18104 against Intel's 15155, a 16.3% advantage. AMD also wins passmark extended instructions, scoring 20114 versus 16897, a 16% lead. Data compression goes to AMD as well: 292698 versus 271774, a 7.1% margin. Integer math is another AMD win, 84228 versus 80396, a 4.5% edge. Random string sorting rounds out AMD's victories, 30266 versus 28866, a 4.6% lead. These results suggest that AMD's Zen 3+ architecture handles memory-intensive, branch-heavy workloads efficiently, even with fewer cores.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 240H is the clear choice for rendering, physics simulation, and any workload that benefits from high single-threaded performance and strong floating-point throughput. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 15764 versus 11992 makes Intel the better option for 3D rendering, video encoding, and other creative applications that scale across cores. The 18.1% single-core advantage in R23 and the 18.8% lead in passmark single thread indicate that Intel also handles everyday responsiveness and lightly threaded applications like web browsing and office productivity with more headroom.

The physics test result, a 70.8% lead, points to Intel being the stronger choice for gaming in CPU-bound scenes and for simulation software that relies on physics engines. The floating-point math advantage of 23.9% further supports Intel for scientific computing and engineering simulation tasks.

The AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS wins in data compression, encryption, extended instructions, integer math, and random string sorting. These are workloads commonly found in database operations, file archiving, cryptographic tasks, and certain types of data analytics. The 16.3% lead in data encryption is particularly notable; this suggests AMD's processor handles AES and other encryption algorithms with greater efficiency. Extended instructions, where AMD leads by 16%, covers workloads that use SIMD and other specialized instruction sets, which are common in multimedia processing and scientific libraries.

The AMD processor also has a higher average benchmark score overall: 32354 versus Intel's 31483, and sits at the 83rd percentile of all CPUs compared to Intel's 82nd. This is despite AMD winning fewer head-to-head tests. The reason is that AMD's wins in data-centric benchmarks are substantial enough to lift its average, while Intel's wins, though numerous, include some very large margins but also some narrower ones. The average benchmark score is a different aggregation than the head-to-head tests, and it slightly favors AMD.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core 7 240H is built on Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-H, and uses a 10 nm process node fabricated by Intel. It features 10 cores and 16 threads, with base and boost clocks of 2.50 GHz and 5.20 GHz respectively. The cache hierarchy is generous: 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. This large L3 cache helps keep frequently accessed data close to the cores, which is likely a contributing factor to its strong floating-point and rendering performance.

The AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS uses Zen 3+ architecture under the Rembrandt codename, fabricated on a 6 nm process by TSMC. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, with base and boost clocks of 3.20 GHz and 4.70 GHz. The cache configuration is smaller: 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. Despite the smaller cache, AMD's performance in data-centric workloads suggests that its memory access patterns and prefetching behavior are well optimized for those tasks.

The process node difference is significant: Intel uses 10 nm while AMD uses 6 nm. The smaller node typically allows for better power efficiency per transistor, which may explain why AMD achieves competitive performance with a 35 W TDP compared to Intel's 45 W TDP. AMD's die size is recorded as 208 mm², and TSMC's 6 nm process likely contributes to the lower power draw. Intel's process node details do not include a die size in the recorded data, but the difference in manufacturing technology is clear from the recorded specifications.

Memory support differs as well. Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, giving OEMs flexibility in system design. AMD supports only DDR5, also dual-channel. AMD also lists a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, a figure that is not recorded for Intel in the database. PCIe support also differs: Intel provides Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only), while AMD provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). This means Intel has the newer PCIe generation but fewer lanes, while AMD has more lanes at Gen 4 speeds.

The integrated graphics differ as well. Intel uses Iris Xe Graphics with 64 execution units, while AMD uses Radeon 680M. Neither processor has a recorded 3D V-Cache, and neither supports ECC memory.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications. The Intel Core 7 240H has 10 cores and 16 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS has 8 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks differ: Intel runs at 2.50 GHz, AMD at 3.20 GHz. Boost clocks differ more substantially: Intel boosts to 5.20 GHz, AMD to 4.70 GHz. The TDP is another clear distinction: Intel is rated at 45 W, AMD at 35 W.

The socket types are different: Intel uses Intel BGA 1744, AMD uses AMD Socket FP7. The process nodes are different: Intel uses 10 nm, AMD uses 6 nm, and the foundries differ: Intel fabricates its own chips, while AMD uses TSMC. Cache sizes differ across all levels: L1 is 80 KB per core on Intel versus 64 KB per core on AMD; L2 is 2 MB per core on Intel versus 512 KB per core on AMD; L3 is 24 MB shared on Intel versus 16 MB shared on AMD.

Memory support differs: Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5, AMD supports only DDR5. Memory bandwidth is recorded for AMD at 76.8 GB/s but is not recorded for Intel. PCIe support differs: Intel has Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only), AMD has Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics differ: Intel has Iris Xe Graphics 64EU, AMD has Radeon 680M. The Intel part has a recorded launch MSRP of $502; no launch MSRP is recorded for AMD. The Intel release date is recorded as 2024-12-17, while AMD has no recorded release date. Both processors are active in production, both are mobile segment parts, both have locked multipliers, and neither supports ECC memory. Intel's part number is SRQ6TQ5ML, AMD's is 100-000000545100-000000561.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-threaded performance?

A: The Intel Core 7 240H wins the Cinebench R23 single-core test with a score of 1719 versus 1455, an 18.1% lead. It also wins passmark single thread with 3782 versus 3184, an 18.8% margin.

Q: Which processor is better for rendering workloads?

A: The Intel Core 7 240H leads in Cinebench R23 multicore with 15764 versus 11992, a 31.5% advantage. It also wins Cinebench R15 multicore with 2360 versus 1987, an 18.8% lead.

Q: Where does the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS outperform the Intel Core 7 240H?

A: AMD wins in data encryption, scoring 18104 versus 15155, a 16.3% lead. AMD also wins extended instructions, data compression, integer math, and random string sorting.

Q: How do the core counts compare?

A: The Intel Core 7 240H has 10 cores and 16 threads. The AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two processors?

A: The Intel Core 7 240H is rated at 45 W, while the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS is rated at 35 W.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS has an average benchmark score of 32354, placing it in the 83rd percentile. The Intel Core 7 240H has an average score of 31483, in the 82nd percentile.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split in use cases. The Intel Core 7 240H is the stronger processor for rendering, physics, floating-point math, and single-threaded workloads. The 31.5% lead in Cinebench R23 multicore and the 70.8% lead in physics make it the obvious choice for creative professionals, engineers running simulations, and users who prioritize raw CPU throughput in multithreaded applications. The 18.8% lead in passmark single thread also means faster everyday responsiveness and better performance in applications that rely on a few fast cores.

The AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS, despite having fewer cores and a lower TDP, holds its own in data-centric tasks. The 16.3% lead in data encryption and the 16% lead in extended instructions make it the better option for workloads involving cryptography, data compression, and specialized instruction sets. Its higher average benchmark score of 32354, compared to Intel's 31483, and its higher percentile ranking, 83rd versus 82nd, indicate that its aggregate performance across all recorded tests is slightly stronger. For users whose primary workloads involve data processing, archiving, or encryption, the AMD processor is the more balanced choice.

The TDP difference is also relevant for mobile designs. AMD's 35 W rating versus Intel's 45 W suggests the Ryzen 7 6800HS can be paired with a lighter cooling solution and potentially offer longer battery life. However, the Intel processor's larger cache hierarchy, 24 MB of L3 versus 16 MB, and its 5.20 GHz boost clock give it a decided advantage in latency-sensitive and lightly threaded workloads.

The choice ultimately depends on workload priority. For rendering, physics, and general single-threaded performance, the Intel Core 7 240H is the stronger pick. For data encryption, compression, and extended instruction workloads, the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS delivers better results, and its higher average benchmark score suggests it is the more consistent performer across the full set of recorded tests.