AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX vs Intel Core Ultra 5 338H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results present a decisive split between two very different mobile processors. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX wins 9 of the 13 recorded comparisons, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H takes 4. The margins, however, tell a more nuanced story than the raw win count.

The most dramatic AMD advantage appears in passmark_integer_math, where the Ryzen 7 8840HX scores 146506 against the Intel part's 64934, a 125.6% lead. This is the largest delta in the entire comparison and suggests a substantial difference in raw integer throughput. Data compression follows a similar pattern: the AMD chip records 496427 versus 276539, a 79.5% advantage. Random string sorting shows a 70.1% lead (57971 against 34082), and extended instructions favor AMD by 52.8% (36527 versus 23906). Data encryption adds a 40% win (29919 versus 21367), and multithread performance shows 41732 against 28717, a 45.3% gap.

Cinebench R23 multicore reinforces the pattern. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX posts 25265, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H manages 16331, giving AMD a 54.7% advantage. This aligns with the multithread results and reflects the AMD chip's 24 threads against the Intel chip's 12. Floating point math is closer: 86747 versus 84067, a modest 3.2% AMD lead. The find_prime_numbers test is an exact tie at 304, the only benchmark where neither side gains ground.

Intel's wins are concentrated in single-threaded and physics workloads. Cinebench R23 singlecore shows the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H at 2044 against 1857 for AMD, a 9.1% edge. PassMark single_thread repeats that pattern at 4180 versus 3958, a 5.3% lead. The physics test is Intel's largest win: 2697 versus 2185, a 19% advantage.

The distribution of wins matters. AMD's victories are often by wide margins, while Intel's are narrower. The two single-thread tests and the physics test are the only places where Intel leads, and none of those margins approach AMD's largest leads. The data indicates that the Ryzen 7 8840HX dominates heavily threaded and data-heavy workloads, while the Core Ultra 5 338H holds a clear but smaller edge in latency-sensitive single-thread tasks.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX wins 9 of the 13 recorded comparisons. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H wins 4.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H leads by 9.1% in Cinebench R23 singlecore (2044 versus 1857) and by 5.3% in PassMark single_thread (4180 versus 3958).

Q: What is the biggest benchmark delta between the two chips?

A: PassMark integer math shows the largest gap. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX scores 146506, which is 125.6% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H's 64934.

Q: Is there any benchmark where the two processors are equal?

A: Yes. The passmark_find_prime_numbers test records an identical score of 304 for both processors.

Q: How do they compare in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX scores 25265, which is 54.7% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H's 16331.

Q: Where does the Intel chip perform best relative to AMD?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H performs best in the physics test, where it scores 2697 against 2185, a 19% advantage. It also wins both single-thread tests.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX uses the Zen 4 architecture under the Dragon Range codename, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H uses the Panther Lake architecture, also called Panther Lake-H, built on a 3 nm process at Intel's own foundry.

Core counts are identical at 12, but thread counts diverge sharply. The AMD chip supports 24 threads through simultaneous multithreading, while the Intel chip offers 12 threads with no equivalent feature. This explains much of the multicore benchmark gap. Clock speeds also differ: the AMD part has a 2.90 GHz base clock and a 5.10 GHz boost clock, while the Intel part runs at 1.90 GHz base and 4.70 GHz boost. Intel's higher single-thread scores come despite the lower clocks, indicating better instructions-per-clock efficiency or other architectural advantages.

Cache layouts are strikingly different. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. Intel allocates more private cache per core, while AMD pools a much larger shared L3. The 64 MB L3 on the AMD chip is more than three times the Intel chip's 18 MB.

Memory support differs as well. AMD uses DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 83.2 GB/s of bandwidth. Intel uses LPDDR5X with a dual-channel bus and 136.5 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel chip's memory bandwidth is roughly 64% higher, a significant advantage for memory-bound tasks. PCIe configuration also diverges: AMD offers Gen 5 with 28 lanes (CPU only), while Intel offers Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics differ: AMD pairs the CPU with a Radeon 610M, while Intel uses the Arc B370.

The process node difference is notable. Intel's 3 nm process is smaller than AMD's 5 nm, though the AMD chip integrates 13,140 million transistors across a 2x 71 mm² die. Transistor count and die size data for the Intel chip are not recorded in the database. Power envelopes also differ, with the AMD part rated at 55 W TDP and the Intel part at 25 W TDP. The AMD multiplier is unlocked, while the Intel multiplier is locked. Release dates also differ: the AMD part launched in 2025-04-22, while the Intel part launched in 2026-01-04. Both use different sockets: AMD Socket FL1 for the Ryzen, Intel BGA 2540 for the Core Ultra.

The Verdict

The recorded data supports a clear division of roles. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX is the stronger choice for heavily threaded workloads. Its 54.7% multicore lead in Cinebench R23, 45.3% multithread lead, and 125.6% integer math lead indicate that any workload that scales across cores will favor AMD substantially. The 24 threads versus 12 threads is the structural reason, and the benchmark results confirm it.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H wins where single-thread latency and physics simulation dominate. Its 9.1% Cinebench R23 singlecore lead, 5.3% PassMark single_thread lead, and 19% physics lead are consistent. The higher memory bandwidth of 136.5 GB/s versus 83.2 GB/s may also benefit certain workloads, though the benchmark data does not isolate this directly. The lower 25 W TDP versus 55 W suggests the Intel chip is positioned for more power-constrained designs, though the database does not include efficiency measurements.

The overall database percentile positions reflect the benchmark averages. The AMD chip sits at the 94th percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 71797, while the Intel chip sits at the 84th percentile with an average of 33989. The AMD chip's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF, which scores 71910 with a delta of -0.2%, and several Xeon server parts. The Intel chip's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H at 34083, the Core i7-12800HX at 33875, and the AMD EPYC 4244P at 34220.

The data does not support a single universal winner. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX is the throughput champion, and the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H is the single-thread and physics leader. The choice depends entirely on workload priorities.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX | Intel Core Ultra 5 338H |

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

| Threads | 24 | 12 |

| Base clock | 2.90 GHz | 1.90 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.10 GHz | 4.70 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 25 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FL1 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Panther Lake |

| Process node | 5 nm (TSMC) | 3 nm (Intel) |

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

| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 64 MB (shared) | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR5 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory bandwidth | 83.2 GB/s | 136.5 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 28 lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 4 lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon 610M | Arc B370 |

| Multiplier | Unlocked | Locked |

| Release date | 2025-04-22 | 2026-01-04 |

| Transistors | 13,140 million | Not recorded |

| Die size | 2x 71 mm² | Not recorded |

Both processors share 12 cores, dual-channel memory buses, and no ECC memory support. Both are mobile parts in active production. Neither has a recorded launch MSRP in the database.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX wins in: integer math (125.6% lead), data compression (79.5%), random string sorting (70.1%), Cinebench R23 multicore (54.7%), extended instructions (52.8%), multithread (45.3%), data encryption (40%), floating point math (3.2%), and the find_prime_numbers tie (0% delta, recorded as an AMD win).

Intel Core Ultra 5 338H wins in: physics (19% lead), Cinebench R23 singlecore (9.1%), and PassMark single_thread (5.3%).

The AMD chip's wins are clustered around throughput-oriented tasks. Integer math, compression, sorting, encryption, and extended instructions all involve moving and transforming large volumes of data across many threads. The 24-thread configuration and 64 MB shared L3 cache appear to be decisive factors. The 125.6% integer math lead is the clearest signal that the AMD chip's architecture is optimized for parallel compute density.

The Intel chip's wins are clustered around latency-sensitive tasks. Single-thread tests measure how quickly one core can execute a serial workload, and the physics test often involves sequential constraint solving where per-core speed matters more than thread count. Intel's higher per-core cache allocations (192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2) and higher memory bandwidth (136.5 GB/s) may contribute to these results, though the benchmark data alone cannot confirm causation.

The floating point math result is the closest contested benchmark at 3.2%, suggesting that FP-heavy workloads are less differentiated than integer-heavy ones. The prime number search tie at 304 is a useful data point: at least one workload shows no measurable difference between the two designs.

For database-style workloads, compression and sorting heavily favor AMD. For interactive or physics-simulation workloads, the Intel chip holds a meaningful edge. The 9.1% single-core lead in Cinebench R23 suggests that lightly threaded applications will feel snappier on the Intel chip, while the 54.7% multicore lead indicates that render farms, compilers, and batch processing will finish far sooner on the AMD chip.