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

The AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS and Intel Core Ultra 5 135H are two mobile processors that land in the same neighborhood of the database rankings, yet the recorded data shows a lopsided contest in most workloads. Both chips sit in the 81st percentile versus all CPUs tracked, with average benchmark scores of 29955 for the AMD part and 29093 for the Intel part. That narrow gap in aggregate hides a much wider spread in individual tests, where AMD wins 13 of 15 head-to-head comparisons. The story here is a highly efficient eight-core Zen 4 design consistently outpacing a fourteen-core Meteor Lake chip across rendering and productivity suites.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results set the tone. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ryzen 7 7840HS scores 2222.84 against 1718 for the Core Ultra 5 135H, a 29.4% advantage. The gap persists in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where AMD records 15102 versus Intel's 11875.5, a 27.2% lead. Rendering clearly favors the AMD chip, and by a wide margin.

Single-core results also go AMD's way, though by smaller margins. The 7840HS posts 274 in Cinebench R15 single-core against 244 for the 135H, a 12.3% win, and 1761 versus 1700 in R23 single-core, a 3.6% edge. Passmark single-thread tells a similar story: 3753 versus 3521, a 6.6% advantage for AMD. Per-core responsiveness belongs to the Ryzen chip despite Intel's higher per-core cache allocation.

The Passmark suite is where AMD dominates hardest. Extended instructions show the largest gap in the entire dataset, with the 7840HS scoring 25747 against 15028, a 71.3% blowout. Integer math goes to AMD 98682 versus 73509 (34.2%), floating point math 59921 versus 54867 (9.2%), data compression 345536 versus 251651 (37.3%), data encryption 20627 versus 15026 (37.3%), random string sorting 40364 versus 28980 (39.3%), and overall multithread 28633 versus 22422 (27.7%).

Intel's two wins are narrow but real. Passmark physics goes to the Core Ultra 5 135H at 1482 versus 1376, a 7.2% edge for AMD's rival, and find prime numbers is essentially a tie, 89 versus 88, a 1.1% Intel win. Physics performance matters for game simulation workloads, so that result is the one data point Intel backers can lean on.

The database also places each chip among its nearest rivals. The 7840HS sits dead even with the AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS (29955 average, 0% delta), marginally ahead of the Ryzen 7 5800XT (0.3%) and Ryzen 7 7840H (0.3%), and 0.8% ahead of the Ryzen 5 9600X. The 135H clusters around the Ryzen 7 5800X (-0.1%), the Xeon Phi 7210 (-0.5%), the Ryzen 5 5600XT (0.5%), and the Core i5-13500HX (-0.6%). In other words, both chips compete in the same performance band as mainstream desktop Ryzen 7 parts.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster overall?

A: The Ryzen 7 7840HS. It wins 13 of 15 head-to-head benchmarks, with an average benchmark score of 29955 versus 29093, and leads by double digits in multi-core rendering (27.2% in Cinebench R23) and several Passmark subtests (up to 71.3% in extended instructions).

Q: Does the Intel chip win anything?

A: Yes, two tests. The Core Ultra 5 135H wins Passmark physics at 1482 versus 1376 (7.2%) and Passmark find prime numbers at 89 versus 88 (1.1%).

Q: How do they compare in single-threaded performance?

A: AMD leads everywhere: 3753 versus 3521 in Passmark single-thread (6.6%), 1761 versus 1700 in Cinebench R23 single-core (3.6%), and 274 versus 244 in Cinebench R15 single-core (12.3%).

Q: Which has more cores and threads?

A: The Core Ultra 5 135H, with 14 cores and 18 threads against 8 cores and 16 threads for the Ryzen 7 7840HS. Despite that, AMD wins most multi-threaded tests.

Q: What integrated graphics does each chip have?

A: The 7840HS ships with the Radeon 780M, while the 135H integrates Arc Xe-LPG graphics with 96 execution units. The database does not include GPU benchmark results for either.

Q: Which is more power efficient on paper?

A: The 135H carries a lower TDP at 28W versus 35W for the 7840HS, but the recorded data shows the AMD chip delivering substantially more performance, so efficiency conclusions depend on how the TDP figures translate in a given laptop design.

Architecture Differences

The Ryzen 7 7840HS is a Zen 4 design, codenamed Phoenix, fabricated on TSMC's 4 nm process. It packs 25,000 million transistors onto a 178 mm² die. The Core Ultra 5 135H uses Intel's Meteor Lake architecture, built on Intel's own 7 nm process; transistor count and die size are not recorded for it in the database.

The core topologies differ sharply. AMD uses a homogeneous layout of 8 cores and 16 threads, while Intel's 14 cores and 18 threads reflect a hybrid design typical of Meteor Lake, trading per-core throughput for thread count. The clock structure favors AMD: a 3.80 GHz base and 5.10 GHz boost, versus 3.60 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost for Intel. That 0.5 GHz boost advantage helps explain the consistent single-core wins.

Cache philosophies diverge too. AMD gives each core 64 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2, with 16 MB of shared L3. Intel allocates more per core, 112 KB of L1 and 2 MB of L2, plus a larger 18 MB shared L3. The Intel design therefore has the raw cache advantage, but the recorded results indicate this did not translate into throughput wins.

Platform features split the decision. AMD offers 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes from the CPU and supports ECC memory, while Intel provides 8 PCIe Gen 5 lanes but no ECC support. Both support dual-channel DDR5 with identical 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth. Sockets are proprietary to each vendor: AMD Socket FP8 versus Intel BGA 2049. Both are active mobile-market parts, both have locked multipliers, and the 135H has a recorded launch MSRP of $342, with the database listing no launch MSRP for the 7840HS.

Specification Differences

The two chips differ on nearly every recorded specification:

• Cores/threads: 8/16 (AMD) versus 14/18 (Intel)
• Base clock: 3.80 GHz versus 3.60 GHz
• Boost clock: 5.10 GHz versus 4.60 GHz
• TDP: 35W versus 28W
• Process node: 4 nm TSMC versus 7 nm Intel
• Cache: 64 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 per core, 16 MB L3 (AMD) versus 112 KB L1 and 2 MB L2 per core, 18 MB L3 (Intel)
• PCIe: Gen 4, 20 lanes versus Gen 5, 8 lanes
• ECC: supported versus not supported
• Integrated graphics: Radeon 780M versus Arc Xe-LPG 96EU
• Socket: AMD Socket FP8 versus Intel BGA 2049

Where they match: both are dual-channel DDR5 designs with 89.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth, both sit in the 81st percentile versus all CPUs, both have locked multipliers, and both remain in active production for the mobile segment.

The Verdict

The data makes this call straightforward. The Ryzen 7 7840HS wins 13 of 15 benchmarks, leads by 27% or more in every multi-threaded rendering and Passmark test, and holds single-digit single-core leads across the board. Buyers prioritizing CPU throughput for rendering, compression, encryption, integer workloads, or general multi-threaded productivity should pick the 7840HS on these results alone.

The Core Ultra 5 135H has a narrower but real case. It wins Passmark physics by 7.2%, which matters for physics-simulation-heavy tasks, and it carries the lower TDP at 28W. Its 14 cores and 18 threads, larger L3 cache, and Gen 5 PCIe lanes give it platform arguments that the CPU benchmark suite does not capture, and its launch MSRP of $342 is the only pricing data the database records for either chip.

Even so, the aggregate scores frame the contest best: 29955 versus 29093, both in the 81st percentile, but with AMD winning nearly every individual measurement. For anyone choosing strictly on the recorded benchmark data, the Ryzen 7 7840HS is the stronger processor of the two.