AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS vs Intel Xeon 6353P Comparison

The Intel Xeon 6353P and AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS are both 8-core, 16-thread processors, but they target fundamentally different environments. The Xeon 6353P is a server/workstation part built on Intel’s Raptor Lake architecture, while the 8840HS is a mobile chip from AMD’s Hawk Point lineup. Despite the Xeon’s workstation classification, the benchmark data reveals a surprisingly competitive landscape. The Intel part wins 10 of the 15 head-to-head comparisons, including every Cinebench test and several PassMark CPU tests, while the AMD chip counters with 5 wins in specific data-processing workloads. Both CPUs sit at the 84th percentile of all processors, and their average benchmark scores are nearly identical: 33844 for the Intel and 33667 for the AMD. This places them in the same performance tier, with the Xeon holding a slim 0.5% average lead over the Ryzen 5 7645HX, which is the closest rival for the Intel part, while the 8840HS matches that same Ryzen 5 7645HX exactly at 0.0% delta.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split: the Intel Xeon 6353P is the choice for raw compute throughput, particularly in rendering and physics simulation. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 22058 is a massive 68.6% higher than the AMD’s 13082, and its single-core R23 result of 3114 beats the 8840HS’s 1737 by 79.3%. These are not marginal gains; they represent a dominant performance advantage in CPU-bound workloads that scale with both core count and frequency. The Xeon’s boost clock of 5.40 GHz, compared to the AMD’s 5.10 GHz, directly contributes to this head start. For users running Cinebench-style rendering or similar multithreaded tasks, the Xeon is unequivocally the stronger processor. Furthermore, the Xeon’s PassMark physics score of 1845 is 60.6% higher than the AMD’s 1149, indicating a substantial edge in simulation and physics calculations.

However, the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS is not without its own domain of superiority. It wins the data compression test with a score of 292888, which is 2.5% higher than the Xeon’s 285581, and it also leads in data encryption (17650 vs 15228, a 13.7% advantage), extended instructions (20714 vs 18311, an 11.6% lead), and integer math (90382 vs 86836, a 3.9% edge). The 8840HS also wins random string sorting with 35517, which is 12.1% ahead of the Xeon’s 31226. These wins suggest that the AMD part has a more efficient architecture for certain integer-heavy and data-manipulation tasks, likely due to its newer 4nm Zen 4 design. If the workload involves compression, encryption, or specific integer operations, the 8840HS is the better performer. The verdict, therefore, is that the Xeon 6353P is for sustained, heavy compute, while the 8840HS is for efficiency-focused data tasks.

Where Each One Wins

Looking at the benchmark breakdown, the Intel Xeon 6353P wins every single rendering and physics benchmark. It wins Cinebench R15 multi-core (2223 vs 2045, 8.7% lead) and single-core (313 vs 270, 15.9% lead). Its Cinebench R23 dominance is even more pronounced, with a 68.6% multi-core and 79.3% single-core advantage. In PassMark tests, the Xeon wins the floating-point math test (63509 vs 52582, a 20.8% lead), find prime numbers (127 vs 79, a 60.8% lead), and the multithread test (25951 vs 24990, a 3.8% lead). The single-thread test also goes to the Xeon, with a score of 4226 versus the AMD’s 3626, a 16.5% advantage. These results paint a picture of a processor with higher peak performance and better scaling in compute-intensive applications.

The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS claims victories in five specific PassMark subtests. The most significant win is in data encryption, where it scores 17650 against the Xeon’s 15228, a 13.7% edge. It also wins extended instructions with a score of 20714, an 11.6% advantage over the Xeon’s 18311. In data compression, the AMD scores 292888, narrowly edging out the Xeon’s 285581 by 2.5%. The integer math win is close, with the AMD scoring 90382 against the Xeon’s 86836, a 3.9% difference. Finally, it wins random string sorting with 35517, which is 12.1% higher than the Xeon’s 31226. These wins are not in raw compute power, but in algorithmic efficiency for data processing, suggesting the Zen 4 architecture handles these specific instruction patterns more effectively.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different foundations. The Intel Xeon 6353P uses the Raptor Lake architecture, manufactured on Intel’s 10nm process node, and features a die size of 257 mm². It has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, with a TDP of 65 watts. Its cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 and 2 MB of L2 per core, along with a 24 MB shared L3 cache. The Xeon supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with ECC memory support, and provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. It has no integrated graphics and is intended for the Server/Workstation segment, using the Intel Socket 1700. Its launch MSRP is $426.

The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS is built on the Zen 4 architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 4nm process node, with a die size of 178 mm² and 25,000 million transistors. It has a higher base clock of 3.30 GHz but a lower boost clock of 5.10 GHz, and a significantly lower TDP of just 28 watts, reflecting its mobile design for the AMD Socket FP8. Its cache is smaller, with 64 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core, and a 16 MB shared L3 cache. It supports only DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration with a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, and does not support ECC. It provides PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU and includes integrated Radeon 780M graphics. The 8840HS is a mobile part, released in December 2023, while the Xeon was released in February 2025. The Xeon’s larger L3 cache and support for ECC memory are key advantages for server workloads, while the AMD’s smaller process node and integrated graphics suit it for mobile use.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core performance?

A: The Intel Xeon 6353P wins every single-threaded test. It scores 4226 in PassMark single-thread, which is 16.5% higher than the AMD’s 3626. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Xeon scores 3114, which is 79.3% higher than the AMD’s 1737.

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS better at any computational task?

A: Yes, the data shows the AMD wins in data compression (292888 vs 285581), data encryption (17650 vs 15228), extended instructions (20714 vs 18311), integer math (90382 vs 86836), and random string sorting (35517 vs 31226). These are specific data-processing workloads.

Q: What is the difference in their power consumption?

A: The Intel Xeon 6353P has a TDP of 65 watts, while the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS has a TDP of 28 watts. This indicates the AMD processor is designed for significantly lower power draw, typical of a mobile part.

Q: Can the Intel Xeon 6353P support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Xeon 6353P has ECC memory support enabled. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS does not support ECC memory, according to the specifications.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Xeon 6353P has an average benchmark score of 33844, while the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS has an average score of 33667. This makes them essentially equal in overall performance, with a 0.5% difference in favor of the Intel.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: Both processors have 8 cores and 16 threads. The core and thread counts are identical, so the performance differences are due to architectural and clock speed variations.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive results in the head-to-head comparison are the Cinebench R23 scores. The Intel Xeon 6353P’s multi-core score of 22058 is a staggering 68.6% higher than the AMD’s 13082. This is the largest margin of victory in any test. The single-core R23 result is even more lopsided, with the Xeon scoring 3114 versus the AMD’s 1737, a delta of 79.3%. These are not close calls; the Xeon is clearly in a different performance class for these rendering workloads. The Cinebench R15 tests follow the same pattern, with the Xeon winning multi-core by 8.7% (2223 vs 2045) and single-core by 15.9% (313 vs 270). This consistent dominance in Cinebench indicates a fundamental advantage in the Xeon’s execution resources.

In the PassMark suite, the Xeon also secures significant wins. It dominates the find prime numbers test, scoring 127 against the AMD’s 79, a 60.8% advantage. Similarly, the physics test shows a 60.6% lead for the Xeon, with scores of 1845 and 1149, respectively. The floating-point math test also goes decisively to the Intel part, with a 20.8% margin (63509 vs 52582). The Xeon’s single-thread score of 4226 is 16.5% higher than the AMD’s 3626. These wins across both Cinebench and PassMark confirm that the Xeon is superior in raw computational throughput and single-core speed.

The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS’s wins are all in the PassMark subtests, and while the margins are smaller, they are consistent. The largest AMD win is in data encryption, with a 13.7% lead (17650 vs 15228). It also wins extended instructions by 11.6% (20714 vs 18311) and random string sorting by 12.1% (35517 vs 31226). Its data compression win is narrow at 2.5% (292888 vs 285581), and its integer math win is even slimmer at 3.9% (90382 vs 86836). The AMD’s multithread score of 24990 is only 3.8% behind the Xeon’s 25951, showing that the overall throughput difference is small, even though the Cinebench multi-core gap is massive. These results suggest that the AMD’s architecture is highly optimized for specific data manipulation instructions, even if it falls behind in general compute tasks.