AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a decisive overall victory for the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus, which wins 12 of the 13 head-to-head comparisons. The sole exception is a notable single win for the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX in integer math, but the margin and scale of Intel’s victories dominate the overall picture.

The most lopsided result is in floating point math, where Intel delivers a score of 162,692 against AMD’s 86,747. That is a 46.7% advantage, the largest delta in the entire comparison. This suggests the Intel part’s execution resources are substantially better suited to heavy FP workloads, a category that includes scientific simulations and certain rendering tasks. The AMD chip’s 12 cores and 24 threads, based on Zen 4, cannot offset the sheer throughput advantage of Intel’s 18-core, 18-thread design in this specific test.

Physics calculations follow a similar pattern. Intel scores 3,494 versus AMD’s 2,185, a 37.5% lead. This is a common proxy for gaming physics and rigid-body simulation, so the gap here points toward Intel having a meaningful edge in that subset of performance. Prime number finding shows a 37.4% delta in Intel’s favor (486 versus 304), which is a stress test for integer-heavy, branch-predictor-sensitive code. The AMD part’s single-thread score of 3,958 is far behind Intel’s 4,757, a 16.8% deficit, so it is not surprising that Intel also wins the single-core Cinebench R23 test by 17.9% (2,261 versus 1,857).

Data encryption is another strong Intel result. The recorded scores are 42,144 for Intel and 29,919 for AMD, a 29% gap. This workload often benefits from AES-NI and wide vector units, and Intel’s lead here is consistent with its broader advantage in extended instruction tests, where it wins by 18% (44,565 versus 36,527). Data compression also goes Intel’s way, 568,721 versus 496,427, a 12.7% margin. Random string sorting, a memory-latency-sensitive test, shows Intel ahead by 16.1% (69,090 versus 57,971).

The multi-threaded PassMark score is 51,596 for Intel against 41,732 for AMD, a 19.1% lead. The Cinebench R23 multi-core result is 30,867 versus 25,265, an 18.1% margin. These are the headline numbers for productivity and rendering, and they consistently favor Intel. The only AMD victory comes in PassMark integer math, where AMD scores 146,506 versus Intel’s 125,091, a 17.1% advantage. That result is curious given Intel’s dominance in other integer-heavy tests like prime number finding, but the data records it as a clear win for AMD. Integer math is a broad mix of arithmetic operations, and AMD’s higher thread count (24 versus 18) may help in this specific parallel workload even if the per-thread performance is lower.

Overall, the average benchmark score in the database is 71,797 for AMD and 66,855 for Intel, which places AMD in the 94th percentile of all CPUs and Intel in the 93rd. The nearest rivals for AMD include the Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF with an average score of 71,910 and a delta of -0.2%, meaning AMD is essentially tied with that higher-tier Intel part. For Intel, the nearest rival is the AMD EPYC 4465P with an average of 66,925 and a delta of -0.1%, so the Ultra 5 250K Plus sits in a similar performance band as a server-class EPYC chip. The data also shows the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus, a sibling part, with an average score of 66,159 and a delta of 1.1%, meaning the 250K Plus is about 1.1% faster than its KF variant.

The Verdict

The benchmark results are unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is the faster processor in nearly every recorded workload. It wins 12 of 13 head-to-head tests, including all of the Cinebench and PassMark multi-threaded suites, all of the single-threaded tests, and all but one of the specialized PassMark subtests. The margin of victory is often large, exceeding 30% in floating point math, physics, and prime number finding. Users who prioritize rendering, data encryption, compression, or general multi-threaded productivity should choose the Intel part based on this data.

The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX is positioned as a mobile processor with a 55 W TDP, and it still manages to be competitive in integer math, where it leads Intel by 17.1%. It also holds a 94th percentile ranking against all CPUs, which is one point higher than Intel’s 93rd. For workloads that are specifically integer-heavy and highly parallel, the AMD chip demonstrates a measurable advantage. The data also shows the AMD part has a higher average benchmark score than Intel (71,797 versus 66,855), which is a counterintuitive result given the head-to-head losses. This is because the average score includes a broader set of tests beyond the 13 head-to-head comparisons, and the AMD part’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF, a higher-tier desktop chip, with a delta of only -0.2%. In that context, the AMD chip is effectively matching a more expensive Intel SKU in the database’s aggregate metric.

The Intel part is a desktop processor with a 125 W TDP, and it launches later in the database timeline. Its 18 cores and 18 threads are a different configuration from AMD’s 12 cores and 24 threads. For users who need maximum multi-threaded throughput in the specific tests recorded, Intel is the clear choice. For users who are constrained to a mobile platform (the AMD chip is in the mobile market segment) and who value integer math performance, the AMD part is the only option that fits that form factor. The data does not suggest any scenario where the AMD chip wins in single-threaded or floating point work, so those workloads should default to the Intel part.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the Cinebench R23 multi-core test?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus wins with a score of 30,867, which is 18.1% higher than the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX’s 25,265.

Q: Is there any test where the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX beats the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus?

A: Yes, in PassMark integer math, AMD scores 146,506 versus Intel’s 125,091, giving AMD a 17.1% advantage. That is the only head-to-head win for AMD out of 13 comparisons.

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-threaded performance?

A: Intel leads in PassMark single-thread with 4,757 versus AMD’s 3,958, a 16.8% difference. In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 2,261 versus AMD’s 1,857, a 17.9% lead.

Q: What is the largest performance gap in the head-to-head results?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark floating point math, where Intel scores 162,692 and AMD scores 86,747, giving Intel a 46.7% advantage.

Q: Which processor has a higher percentile ranking against all CPUs?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX is in the 94th percentile, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is in the 93rd percentile.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX has an average benchmark score of 71,797, and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has an average of 66,855.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several core specification fields. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads. The base clock is 2.90 GHz for AMD and 4.20 GHz for Intel, and the boost clock is 5.10 GHz for AMD and 5.30 GHz for Intel. The thermal design power is 55 W for AMD and 125 W for Intel. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FL1, while Intel uses Intel Socket 1851.

Memory support is DDR5 for both, with dual-channel buses, but the memory bandwidth is 83.2 GB/s for AMD and 115.2 GB/s for Intel. AMD does not support ECC memory, while Intel does. The PCIe configuration is Gen 5 with 28 lanes for AMD and Gen 5 with 20 lanes for Intel. The integrated graphics are Radeon 610M for AMD and Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU for Intel. The market segment is Mobile for AMD and Desktop for Intel. The AMD part has a release date in April 2025, while Intel’s is in March 2026. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $199. Both processors have an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX uses the Zen 4 architecture with the Dragon Range codename, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus uses the Arrow Lake Refresh codename from the Core Ultra Series 2. The AMD part is built on a 5 nm process node at TSMC, while Intel is built on a 3 nm process node, also at TSMC. The transistor count is 13,140 million for AMD and 17,800 million for Intel. The die size is 2x 71 mm² for AMD and 243 mm² for Intel.

Cache configurations differ significantly. AMD has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3 cache. Intel has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger L3 on AMD is a notable advantage for some workloads, though the recorded benchmarks do not show it translating into wins outside of integer math. The process node difference (5 nm versus 3 nm) and the transistor count difference (17.8 billion versus 13.14 billion) indicate that Intel’s chip has a more complex design, which is consistent with its higher core count and larger die. The Intel part also uses a different integrated graphics solution, the Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU, compared to AMD’s Radeon 610M, and it has the higher memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s versus 83.2 GB/s.