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

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is heavily lopsided. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus wins 12 of the 13 recorded comparisons, leaving AMD's Ryzen 7 8840HX with a single victory. The margins are often substantial, especially in CPU-bound compute workloads.

The most dramatic gap appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core. Intel scores 42,718 against AMD's 25,265, a delta of 40.9% in Intel's favor. That is a decisive margin for heavily threaded rendering tasks. Single-core Cinebench R23 is even more lopsided: Intel posts 6,030 versus 1,857, a 69.2% gap. The Ryzen 7's single-core result is less than a third of the Intel part's, which suggests a fundamental difference in clock behavior and architecture efficiency at low thread counts.

Floating-point math follows the same pattern. Intel's Passmark result is 159,824, while AMD manages 86,747, a 45.7% deficit. The prime number finding test shows a 32.7% gap (452 versus 304), and the physics test shows a 31.4% gap (3,183 versus 2,185). These all point to Intel's advantage in raw arithmetic throughput per cycle.

The Intel chip also leads in memory-related and data-movement workloads. Data compression scores 553,155 versus 496,427, a 10.3% edge. Random string sorting goes to Intel by 13.7% (67,209 versus 57,971). Data encryption shows a 27.5% gap (41,292 versus 29,919). Extended instruction set performance favors Intel by 14.8% (42,880 versus 36,527).

Passmark multi-thread results give Intel a 16.8% lead (50,146 versus 41,732). Single-threaded Passmark shows a 15.8% advantage for Intel (4,698 versus 3,958). Both the single_thread and singlethread entries record the same numbers, confirming consistency.

AMD's only win is in Passmark integer math. The Ryzen 7 scores 146,506 against Intel's 123,030, a 19.1% advantage. That is a meaningful outlier. Integer-heavy workloads, such as certain compilers, scripting engines, or database operations, could favor the AMD part despite its overall disadvantage.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher Cinebench R23 multi-core score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 42,718, which is 40.9% higher than the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX's 25,265.

Q: Does the AMD chip win any benchmark at all?

A: Yes, the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX leads Passmark integer math with 146,506 versus Intel's 123,030, a 19.1% margin.

Q: How large is the single-core performance gap?

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 6,030 versus AMD's 1,857, a 69.2% difference. Passmark single-thread shows a smaller 15.8% gap in Intel's favor.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each CPU?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX has an average benchmark score of 71,797, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus averages 66,159.

Q: How do the two CPUs compare in the database's percentile ranking?

A: The AMD chip ranks in the 94th percentile among all CPUs, while the Intel chip ranks in the 93rd percentile.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus supports ECC memory. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX does not.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies. AMD's Ryzen 7 8840HX uses the Zen 4 architecture under the Dragon Range codename. It is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC and packs 13,140 million transistors across a die size of 2x 71 mm². Intel's Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus uses the Arrow Lake Refresh codename, built on a 3 nm process at TSMC with 17,800 million transistors on a single 243 mm² die.

Cache organization differs substantially. AMD allocates 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and shares a 64 MB L3 pool. Intel allocates 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and shares a 30 MB L3 pool. The AMD design has a much larger total L3, which benefits workloads that reuse large working sets. Intel's larger per-core L1 and L2 can help with per-thread locality and latency.

The core counts and thread counts diverge sharply. AMD provides 12 cores and 24 threads, using simultaneous multithreading. Intel provides 18 cores and 18 threads, with no hyperthreading on this part. AMD's thread advantage allows it to schedule more concurrent work, but Intel's higher base clock of 4.20 GHz versus 2.90 GHz and boost clock of 5.30 GHz versus 5.10 GHz compensate in raw throughput.

Memory bandwidth also differs. AMD lists 83.2 GB/s, while Intel lists 115.2 GB/s. Both support DDR5 and dual-channel memory buses. Intel also enables ECC memory, which AMD does not. PCIe connectivity favors AMD with 28 Gen 5 lanes (CPU only), while Intel provides 20 Gen 5 lanes. AMD integrates Radeon 610M graphics, while Intel has no integrated graphics, hence the "KF" designation.

Both CPUs have unlocked multipliers. AMD uses the AMD Socket FL1, a mobile platform, while Intel uses Intel Socket 1851, a desktop platform. The market segments confirm this: AMD is mobile, Intel is desktop. Production status is Active for both.

Specification Differences

The table below isolates only the fields where the two CPUs differ:

| Field | AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX | Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus |

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

| Cores | 12 | 18 |

| Threads | 24 | 18 |

| Base clock | 2.90 GHz | 4.20 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.10 GHz | 5.30 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 125 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FL1 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Process node | 5 nm | 3 nm |

| Codename | Dragon Range | Arrow Lake Refresh |

| Transistors | 13,140 million | 17,800 million |

| Die size | 2x 71 mm² | 243 mm² |

| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 64 MB (shared) | 30 MB (shared) |

| Memory bandwidth | 83.2 GB/s | 115.2 GB/s |

| ECC memory | false | true |

| PCIe lanes | Gen 5, 28 (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon 610M | N/A |

| Market segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release date | 2025-04-22 | 2026-03-10 |

| Launch MSRP | none listed | $184 |

The TDP difference is notable: 55 W for AMD versus 125 W for Intel. That affects cooling requirements and power delivery. The release dates are roughly 11 months apart, with Intel arriving later.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus wins almost every measured benchmark category. It dominates rendering, single-threaded performance, floating-point math, physics simulation, data compression, encryption, extended instructions, and random string sorting. For users running Cinebench-style workloads, scientific computing with heavy FP math, or any task that benefits from high single-core speed such as legacy software or lightly threaded games, the Intel chip is the clear choice. Its 5.30 GHz boost clock and 18 physical cores provide a combination of high frequency and high core count that the AMD part cannot match in most tests.

The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX wins only Passmark integer math. That means workloads dominated by integer operations, for example certain database engines, compression algorithms with integer arithmetic, or specific cryptography routines, may show a narrower gap or even favor AMD. The 24 threads also give AMD a scheduling advantage for highly parallel integer workloads, even though its per-thread performance is lower. Additionally, the 64 MB shared L3 cache could help with integer-heavy data sets that fit in cache.

The AMD chip's integrated Radeon 610M graphics provide a built-in display output, while the Intel part requires a discrete GPU. For a mobile platform, that is essential; for a desktop part, it is irrelevant. AMD's 28 PCIe Gen 5 lanes also allow more expansion devices than Intel's 20 lanes.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is the faster processor in nearly all recorded tests, with margins ranging from 10.3% in data compression to 69.2% in Cinebench R23 single-core. Its 18 cores, higher clocks, and newer 3 nm process deliver superior results across rendering, math, physics, encryption, and single-threaded tasks. The 93rd percentile ranking versus AMD's 94th may seem contradictory given the benchmark wins, but the average benchmark score tells the story: AMD averages 71,797, Intel averages 66,159. That gap exists because AMD's one strong win (integer math) plus its competitive scores in other Passmark tests pull its average up, while Intel's extreme Cinebench scores are balanced by lower Passmark scores in some categories.

The Ryzen 7 8840HX remains a reasonable choice for integer-heavy workloads, where it leads by 19.1%. Its 55 W TDP makes it far more power-efficient, and the mobile socket means it targets laptops and compact systems. The integrated graphics remove the need for a separate GPU in those systems. The 24 threads provide ample parallelism for integer tasks.

The Intel chip suits desktop builders who prioritize maximum performance in multi-core rendering, floating-point math, and single-thread responsiveness. It has ECC memory support for reliability-sensitive use cases and a later release date. The launch MSRP of $184 provides a reference point for its positioning, though the database does not include pricing for the AMD part.

Choose Intel for raw speed across most workloads. Choose AMD for integer-math-heavy tasks, integrated graphics, lower power draw, and mobile form factors. The data does not support any other conclusion.