AMD Ryzen 7 7840H vs Intel Core Ultra 5 135H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data reveals a decisive overall victory for the AMD Ryzen 7 7840H, which claims 15 wins against 2 for the Intel Core Ultra 5 135H. The margin of victory, however, varies dramatically by workload type, telling a nuanced story about where each chip excels.

The single most lopsided result appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core. The AMD part scores 23,731 against Intel's 11,875.5, a 99.8% advantage. That is nearly double the performance, an extraordinary gap for two mobile processors in the same class. This pattern repeats in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the 7840H posts 3,350 versus 1,700, a 97.1% lead. These two results alone suggest fundamental architectural advantages in sustained and bursty compute that Intel's Meteor Lake cannot match in this comparison.

The Cinebench R15 and R20 results tell a similar, though less extreme, story. In R15 multi, the AMD chip leads 2,392 to 1,718, a 39.2% difference. Single-core R15 shows a 38.1% gap (337 vs 244). Moving to R20, the AMD chip holds a 27.2% lead in multi (9,967 vs 7,834) and a 27.3% lead in single (1,407 vs 1,105). The pattern is consistent: across every Cinebench version, the AMD chip leads by a substantial margin, with the gap widening in newer, more demanding workloads.

PassMark results show a more varied picture. The AMD chip wins integer math by 31.5% (96,692 vs 73,509) and data compression by 35.7% (341,520 vs 251,651). Data encryption also favors AMD at 34.2% (20,162 vs 15,026). The extended instructions test is another lopsided AMD win, at 70.7% (25,654 vs 15,028). Random string sorting is 34.4% in AMD's favor (38,938 vs 28,980). Even floating point math, typically not AMD's strongest area, goes to the 7840H by 7% (58,724 vs 54,867).

The Intel chip does claim two wins, and they are worth investigating. In the PassMark physics test, the Core Ultra 5 135H scores 1,482 against 1,301, a 12.2% advantage. In prime number finding, Intel leads 89 to 83, a 6.7% margin. These are narrow wins in specific integer and physics workloads, suggesting the Intel chip has some specialized strengths but cannot generalize them into broader performance.

The single-threaded PassMark results are much closer than the Cinebench single-core numbers. The AMD wins 3,641 to 3,521, only 3.4% apart. This is a notable discrepancy with the 97.1% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core. The difference likely reflects the specific instruction mixes and how each test scales with the processors' different boost clocks and cache hierarchies. The record shows that while AMD has a huge edge in one rendering workload, the simpler integer tests show near parity.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher Cinebench R23 multi-core score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 7840H scores 23,731, which is 99.8% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 5 135H's 11,875.5.

Q: Does the Intel chip win any benchmark?

A: Yes, the Intel wins two PassMark tests: find prime numbers (89 vs 83) and physics (1,482 vs 1,301). These are narrow margins of 6.7% and 12.2% respectively.

Q: How close are the single-threaded PassMark scores?

A: The AMD chip scores 3,641 and the Intel scores 3,521, a difference of only 3.4%. This is much closer than the Cinebench R23 single-core gap of 97.1%.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 7840H has an average benchmark score of 29,868. The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H has an average score of 29,093.

Q: Which chip has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 7840H has a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H has a boost clock of 4.60 GHz.

Q: How many cores and threads does each have?

A: The AMD has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel has 14 cores and 18 threads.

Architecture Differences

The most fundamental difference lies in the manufacturing process and foundational architecture. The AMD Ryzen 7 7840H is built on TSMC's 4nm node with a die size of 178 mm² and a transistor count of 25,000 million. The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H uses Intel's 7 nm process (the record lists it as 7 nm) with no transistor count or die size specified.

AMD's architecture, Zen 4, is codenamed Phoenix. It uses a monolithic design with 8 cores and 16 threads. This is a uniform core arrangement, where all cores are identical and can handle any workload. The Intel part, codenamed Meteor Lake, uses a hybrid architecture with 14 cores and 18 threads. This implies a mix of performance and efficient cores, though the database does not specify the exact distribution. The differing core counts suggest Intel relies on more total cores to achieve its throughput, while AMD's fewer but larger cores deliver higher per-thread performance.

Cache topology is also different. AMD provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. Intel provides 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The Intel design has larger per-core L1 and L2 caches, which may explain its strong showing in the prime number test. But the AMD has a smaller L3 total, and with fewer cores, the effective per-core L3 is likely higher.

Memory support differs in specifics. Both support DDR5 and are dual-channel. Both have the same memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. A key difference is ECC: AMD supports ECC memory while Intel does not. This is a significant feature for reliability-focused users.

The power characteristics are also distinct. The AMD has a TDP of 35 W, while the Intel has a TDP of 28 W. This lower power draw from Intel is notable given its higher core count, but the benchmark results show it does not translate into higher performance in most tests.

The integrated graphics differ as well. AMD uses the Radeon 780M, while Intel uses Arc Xe-LPG 96EU. The database does not include graphics benchmarks, so no direct comparison is possible here.

Specification Differences

The two chips differ across several key specification fields.

• Cores: AMD has 8, Intel has 14.
• Threads: AMD has 16, Intel has 18.
• Base clock: AMD runs at 3.80 GHz, Intel at 3.60 GHz.
• Boost clock: AMD reaches 5.10 GHz, Intel reaches 4.60 GHz.
• TDP: AMD is rated at 35 W, Intel at 28 W.
• Socket: AMD uses AMD Socket FP8, Intel uses Intel BGA 2049.
• Architecture: AMD uses Zen 4 (Phoenix), Intel uses Meteor Lake.
• Process node: AMD is on TSMC 4 nm, Intel is on Intel 7 nm.
• Foundry: AMD uses TSMC, Intel uses Intel.
• Transistors: AMD has 25,000 million, Intel does not list a figure.
• Die size: AMD is 178 mm², Intel has no listed size.
• L1 cache: AMD has 64 KB per core, Intel has 112 KB per core.
• L2 cache: AMD has 1 MB per core, Intel has 2 MB per core.
• L3 cache: AMD has 16 MB shared, Intel has 18 MB shared.
• ECC support: AMD supports ECC, Intel does not.
• PCIe: AMD supports Gen 4 with 20 lanes, Intel supports Gen 5 with 8 lanes.
• Integrated graphics: AMD has Radeon 780M, Intel has Arc Xe-LPG 96EU.
• Release date: Intel released on 2023-12-13, AMD has no listed release date.
• Launch MSRP: Intel has a launch MSRP of $342, AMD has none listed.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 7 7840H is the dominant all-rounder. It wins every rendering workload, every Cinebench test, and every PassMark test except two. The largest wins are in Cinebench R23 multi (99.8%) and single (97.1%), which indicate it is exceptionally strong for tasks like 3D rendering, video editing, and other multi-threaded creative workloads. Its 34-70% leads in encryption, random string sorting, and extended instructions point to strong performance in cryptography, data processing, and instruction-heavy scientific workloads. The data suggests it is the better choice for any user who runs sustained CPU loads, from content creation to software compilation.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H has a narrower field of victory. It wins in prime number finding by 6.7% and in the physics test by 12.2%. These are specific, integer-heavy, and possibly latency-sensitive workloads. The physics test may reflect a particular instruction pattern or memory access profile that the Meteor Lake architecture handles better. The Intel also has a lower TDP of 28 W compared to AMD's 35 W, which means it may be more efficient for light workloads or in thin-and-light laptops, although the database does not provide power benchmarks. For users whose tasks are heavily focused on the specific prime-number or physics workloads, the Intel chip is the better choice. For everything else, the AMD is clearly ahead.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The AMD Ryzen 7 7840H is the superior processor in nearly every measured category. It wins 15 of 17 head-to-head tests, with margins ranging from 3.4% to 99.8%. The only meaningful lead for the Intel Core Ultra 5 135H is in the prime number and physics tests, both by small margins.

The Intel chip does have a lower TDP, which could be relevant for battery life in mobile devices, but the benchmark data shows this efficiency does not come with a performance benefit. The AMD chip has a higher boost clock, a more advanced 4 nm process, and ECC support, which are tangible technical advantages.

For the majority of users, the AMD Ryzen 7 7840H is the clear pick. Its performance in Cinebench R23 and the PassMark suite makes it ideal for any workload that demands raw compute power. The only user who might prefer the Intel is one whose specific application is dominated by the prime-number and physics tests, and even then, the margin is small.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H is not a bad processor; it is a decent mobile CPU that happens to be outclassed by a more modern and more powerful competitor. The data shows that AMD's Phoenix architecture is currently a better approach for mobile computing. The Intel's 14 cores and 18 threads do not overpower the AMD's 8 cores and 16 threads, proving that core count is not everything. The record shows that the AMD chip's combination of higher clock speeds, larger L3 cache per core, and more efficient node yields a comprehensive victory.