AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS vs Intel Core 5 213PTE Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in single-core Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PTE is significantly faster, scoring 3070 versus the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS's 1737. That is a 43.4% advantage for Intel in this workload.

Q: Which chip wins in multi-threaded rendering?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PTE dominates in Cinebench R23 multicore, scoring 21751 against AMD's 13082, a 39.9% lead. It also wins in Cinebench R15 multicore, 2192 versus 2045.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS have any benchmark wins?

A: Yes, it wins four of the fifteen head-to-head tests. Its largest victory is in PassMark data encryption, where it scores 17650 versus Intel's 14413, a 22.5% margin. It also leads in data compression, extended instructions, and random string sorting.

Q: How do the two compare in overall average benchmark scores?

A: The AMD chip has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 33667, placing it in the 84th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel part averages 32924, landing in the 83rd percentile.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each processor according to the database?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS sits right next to the AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX (0% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT (-0.2%). The Intel Core 5 213PTE is closest to the Intel Core i7-12700 (-0.1% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D (-0.5%).

Q: Do both processors have the same core and thread counts?

A: Yes, both feature 8 cores and 16 threads. However, they differ significantly in clock speeds, cache layout, and manufacturing process.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS is built on TSMC's 4 nm process using the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Hawk Point. It belongs to the 8000 series and is designed for mobile platforms, using the AMD Socket FP8. The silicon packs 25,000 million transistors into a 178 mm² die. In contrast, the Intel Core 5 213PTE is a desktop part from the Bartlett Lake family, manufactured on Intel's 10 nm node and using the Intel Socket 1700. Intel does not disclose transistor count or die size in the database.

Cache structures diverge notably. AMD allocates 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, with 16 MB of shared L3. Intel provides more generous per-core allocations: 80 KB of L1 and 2 MB of L2 per core, plus a larger 24 MB shared L3. That extra L3 capacity likely contributes to the Intel part's strong performance in cache-sensitive workloads.

Clock behavior differs as well. The AMD chip runs at a 3.30 GHz base clock and boosts to 5.10 GHz. The Intel part starts lower at 2.10 GHz base but boosts slightly higher to 5.20 GHz. The Intel processor carries a higher 45 W TDP compared to AMD's 28 W, reflecting the desktop orientation versus the mobile focus.

Memory support also separates the two. AMD supports DDR5 only, while Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but AMD's memory bandwidth is rated at 89.6 GB/s versus Intel's 76.8 GB/s. The AMD chip supports ECC memory, a feature Intel also includes. For PCIe, AMD offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes, while Intel provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes.

Integrated graphics differ as well. AMD uses the Radeon 780M, while Intel relies on UHD Graphics 730. The AMD part is a mobile processor, and the Intel part is a desktop processor, which shapes their respective platform positioning.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core 5 213PTE wins 11 of the 15 recorded comparisons, and its victories are often decisive. The largest gap appears in Cinebench R23 single-core, where Intel's 3070 score beats AMD's 1737 by 43.4%. Cinebench R23 multicore shows a similar story: Intel scores 21751 against 13082, a 39.9% lead. These Cinebench results suggest Intel has a substantial advantage in both lightly threaded and heavily threaded rendering tasks.

The PassMark physics test is another Intel landslide, with 2199 versus AMD's 1149, a 47.7% margin. The prime number finding test also favors Intel heavily, 157 against 79, a 49.7% difference. Floating-point math goes to Intel as well, 71722 versus 52582, a 26.7% gap. Even in integer math, where the margin is smaller, Intel leads with 93109 versus 90382, a 2.9% edge. PassMark multithread shows Intel ahead by 2.3% (25590 versus 24990), and single-thread tests give Intel a 2.5% win (3718 versus 3626).

The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS counters with four wins, all in specific PassMark workloads. Its strongest performance comes in data encryption, where 17650 beats Intel's 14413 by 22.5%. Extended instructions also favor AMD, 20714 versus 16146, a 28.3% margin. Data compression goes to AMD with 292888 against 261083, a 12.2% advantage. Random string sorting rounds out AMD's wins, 35517 versus 30106, an 18% lead.

Interpreting these results, the Intel part appears optimized for raw compute throughput, particularly in rendering, physics simulation, and prime number calculations. The AMD chip shows strengths in encryption, compression, and string manipulation, suggesting its architecture handles certain data-processing tasks more efficiently. The overall average benchmark scores remain close, with AMD at 33667 and Intel at 32924, a difference of roughly 2.3% in AMD's favor across all recorded tests.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split based on workload. For users prioritizing Cinebench rendering, physics simulation, or prime number computation, the Intel Core 5 213PTE is the stronger choice. Its 43.4% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core and 39.9% lead in multicore are decisive, and the 47.7% margin in PassMark physics reinforces that pattern. The Intel chip also wins the overall head-to-head count, 11 versus 4.

For workloads involving encryption, compression, or extended instruction sets, the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS holds the advantage. The 22.5% win in data encryption and 28.3% win in extended instructions show where the Zen 4 architecture excels. The AMD part also edges out Intel in average benchmark score, 33667 versus 32924, and holds a slightly better percentile ranking at 84 versus 83.

The Intel part is a desktop processor with a higher TDP and a higher boost clock, while the AMD part is a mobile chip with a lower TDP and lower boost clock. The Intel chip offers more L3 cache (24 MB versus 16 MB) and per-core L2 cache (2 MB versus 1 MB). The AMD chip provides higher memory bandwidth (89.6 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s) and PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes versus Intel's Gen 5 with 16 lanes.

Given the benchmark data, the Intel Core 5 213PTE is the better performer for compute-heavy tasks, especially those that scale with cache and clock speed. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS is preferable for data-centric workloads and for scenarios where its lower TDP and mobile platform matter. Neither chip is uniformly superior; the choice depends entirely on the intended workload and platform constraints.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS | Intel Core 5 213PTE |

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

| Cores | 8 | 8 |

| Threads | 16 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 3.30 GHz | 2.10 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.10 GHz | 5.20 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 45 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Process Node | 4 nm (TSMC) | 10 nm (Intel) |

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

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

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

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 76.8 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | False | True |

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

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 780M | UHD Graphics 730 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Part Number | 100-000001372 (FP7r2), 100-000001379 (FP7), 100-000001357 (FP8) | SA4QM |