AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF and AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX present a compelling comparison despite their different market segments. The data shows a clear overall winner, but a deep dive reveals specific workloads where the AMD part holds its ground. With an average benchmark score of 71,910 against 71,797, the Intel part leads by a razor-thin 0.2% margin, placing both in the 94th percentile of all CPUs. This near-parity in overall score, however, masks the dramatic swings in individual workload performance.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are overwhelmingly one-sided. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF wins 12 of the 13 head-to-head comparisons, often by a substantial margin. The most striking difference appears in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Intel part scores 7,021 versus the AMD's 1,857, a staggering 278.1% advantage. This is not a marginal lead; it signifies a generational leap in per-thread performance that dominates lightly-threaded applications.

Multi-core performance tells a similar story, though the gap is smaller. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel part scores 49,736 against the AMD's 25,265, resulting in a 96.9% delta. This near-doubling of performance aligns with the Intel part's higher core count and thread count, making it the clear choice for rendering and heavily parallelized tasks. The PassMark multi-thread test confirms this trend, with the Intel part scoring 58,518 versus 41,732, a 40.2% advantage.

The Intel part's dominance extends to most specialized workloads. In PassMark floating-point math, it scores 189,431 compared to the AMD's 86,747, a 118.4% delta, indicating superior performance in scientific and engineering simulations. Data encryption also favors Intel heavily, with a score of 48,198 versus 29,919 (61.1% delta). Even in extended instruction sets, which test modern CPU features like AVX, Intel leads by 49.2% (54,513 vs 36,527). Physics simulations show a 66.3% delta (3,633 vs 2,185), and random string sorting, a common proxy for database operations, sees Intel ahead by 37.5% (79,735 vs 57,971).

The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX manages a single victory in this head-to-head, and it is a notable one. In the PassMark integer math test, AMD scores 146,506 against Intel's 143,351, a 2.2% win. This is a narrow but real advantage, suggesting that the AMD architecture has a slight edge in raw integer throughput, which can benefit certain cryptography and compression algorithms. However, this win is an outlier in an otherwise one-sided comparison. The Intel part also wins the single-thread PassMark test by 24.5% (4,928 vs 3,958), reinforcing the Cinebench single-core result.

FAQ

Q: What is the most significant performance difference between the two CPUs?

A: The most significant difference is in single-core performance. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF delivers a 278.1% higher score in Cinebench R23 single-core, a margin that dwarfs all other differences and indicates a major advantage in per-thread speed.

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX better at any compute task?

A: Yes, benchmark results indicate the AMD part is slightly better at integer math. In the PassMark integer math test, it scores 146,506 versus the Intel's 143,351, a 2.2% advantage, though this is the only head-to-head test the AMD part wins.

Q: How do the two CPUs compare in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The Intel part is substantially faster. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 49,736 versus the AMD's 25,265, a 96.9% delta. The PassMark multi-thread test shows a 40.2% advantage for Intel, confirming its leadership in heavily threaded tasks.

Q: Which CPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF has a marginally higher average benchmark score of 71,910, compared to the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX's 71,797. This represents a 0.2% difference, placing the Intel part as the nominal leader in overall performance.

Q: Do both CPUs support the same memory technology?

A: Both support DDR5 memory with a dual-channel memory bus. However, the Intel part has a higher theoretical memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, while the AMD part is rated at 83.2 GB/s.

Q: Are these CPUs equally suited for the same type of computer?

A: No. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF is a desktop part for socket 1851, while the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX is a mobile part for AMD Socket FL1. This difference in market segment is a primary factor in their different specifications and power profiles.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF uses the Arrow Lake architecture (Arrow Lake-S codename) from the Core Ultra Series 2, fabricated on a 3 nm process node. In contrast, the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX is based on the Zen 4 architecture (Dragon Range codename) from the 8000 series, using a more mature 5 nm process node. Both are manufactured by TSMC, but the difference in node size contributes to their distinct characteristics.

Core and thread configurations are starkly different. The Intel part features 20 cores and 20 threads, indicating a design without hyperthreading. The AMD part has 12 cores but 24 threads, leveraging simultaneous multithreading. The Intel part's higher core count is a direct contributor to its multi-core performance wins, while the AMD part's higher thread count per core does not compensate for the lower core count in most multi-threaded tests.

Cache hierarchies are also divergent. The Intel part has a larger L1 cache at 192 KB per core and a larger L2 cache at 3 MB per core. However, the AMD part counters with a significantly larger shared L3 cache of 64 MB, compared to the Intel's 30 MB. This larger L3 cache can be beneficial for data-heavy workloads that fit within its capacity. The transistor count also reflects the complexity of the designs: the Intel part has 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, while the AMD part has 13,140 million transistors distributed across two 71 mm² dies.

Feature sets show clear differences in target use cases. The Intel part has no integrated graphics (N/A), while the AMD part includes a Radeon 610M iGPU. The AMD part also offers more PCIe lanes (28 versus 20 for Intel, both Gen 5), suggesting a design for mobile systems with more expansion options. Both CPUs are unlocked for overclocking, and neither supports ECC memory.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets reveal the fundamental positioning of each product. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF is a desktop processor with a TDP of 125 W, while the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX is a mobile processor with a much lower TDP of 55 W. This power difference is a direct consequence of their intended environments, with the desktop part designed for high sustained performance and the mobile part for efficiency within thermal limits.

Clock speeds differ significantly. The Intel part has a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. The AMD part has a lower base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. While both can reach high boost frequencies, the Intel part's higher base clock and boost clock contribute to its commanding lead in single-core benchmarks.

The physical specifications are entirely different. The Intel part uses the Intel Socket 1851, while the AMD part uses the AMD Socket FL1. The Intel part was released on 2024-10-23, while the AMD part was released later on 2025-04-22. The Intel part also has a stated launch MSRP of $379, while the AMD part has no launch MSRP listed. Memory bandwidth is another differentiator, with the Intel part rated at 102.4 GB/s versus the AMD's 83.2 GB/s, both on dual-channel DDR5. The part numbers are also unique: SRQCU for Intel and 100-000001850 for AMD.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF is the superior performer in nearly every measurable metric. Its 96.9% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 278.1% lead in single-core make it the definitive choice for users prioritizing raw compute power, whether for professional rendering, complex simulations, or high-refresh-rate gaming that depends on single-thread speed. The 12 out of 13 benchmark wins, including a 40.2% advantage in multi-thread and a 24.5% advantage in single-thread PassMark tests, leave little room for doubt.

The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX, however, should not be dismissed. Its single victory in integer math (2.2% ahead) hints at a specific strength that could matter in niche workloads. More importantly, its classification as a mobile part with a 55 W TDP means it is designed for a completely different use case. A user building a desktop workstation would have no reason to choose the AMD part based on this benchmark data alone, given the Intel part's overwhelming performance advantage. Conversely, the AMD part's existence in the mobile segment, with its integrated Radeon 610M graphics, makes it a viable option for a laptop where the Intel part, with its desktop socket and lack of iGPU, could not be used. For a desktop user, the choice is clear: the Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF is the benchmark leader.