AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX vs Intel Core Ultra X7 368H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear split between the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX and the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H, with each processor dominating in distinct workload categories. The Intel chip claims 7 benchmark wins against 6 for AMD, but the magnitude of those wins tells a more nuanced story than the raw count.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H posts 28221 points against 25265 for the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX, a 10.5% advantage. The single-core gap is far more dramatic: Intel scores 3984 in Cinebench R23 single-core versus AMD's 1857, which translates to a 53.4% deficit for the Ryzen part. That is the largest delta in the entire head-to-head set, and it immediately signals a fundamental difference in architecture and clock behavior.

AMD does not go unanswered. The Ryzen 7 8840HX delivers a crushing 66.3% lead in PassMark integer math, scoring 146506 against Intel's 88083. Data compression shows a 58.6% advantage for AMD at 496427 versus 312927. Random string sorting favors AMD by 52.2% (57971 versus 38093), and extended instructions go to AMD by 42.3% (36527 versus 25669). The multithread score also favors AMD, with 41732 against Intel's 32956, a 26.6% margin. Data encryption rounds out AMD's wins at 29919 versus 25228, an 18.6% gap.

Intel's other wins are more moderate. Floating point math goes to Intel at 105681 versus 86747, a 17.9% edge. Physics simulation favors Intel by 23.5% (2857 versus 2185). Find prime numbers is close, with Intel at 321 versus AMD's 304, only a 5.3% gap. The PassMark single-thread score is nearly identical: 4005 for Intel, 3958 for AMD, a 1.2% difference that essentially puts the two chips on par for single-threaded integer work despite the Cinebench single-core discrepancy.

The aggregate benchmark picture reinforces this split. AMD's average benchmark score sits at 71797, placing it in the 94th percentile against all CPUs. Intel's average is 40518, which lands in the 87th percentile. However, those averages are skewed by the mix of tests: AMD's huge wins in integer, compression, and multithread inflate its average, while Intel's decisive single-core victory and strong floating point show up in specific tests rather than the aggregate.

Where Each One Wins

The workload split is unusually clean. AMD's Ryzen 7 8840HX wins every test that involves integer arithmetic, data manipulation, or heavy parallel threading. Its 12 cores and 24 threads give it a structural advantage in multithreaded throughput, and the data confirms it: 26.6% ahead in multithread, 66.3% ahead in integer math, 58.6% ahead in compression, 52.2% ahead in random string sorting, 42.3% ahead in extended instructions, and 18.6% ahead in encryption. These are exactly the kinds of workloads that benefit from more physical cores and simultaneous multithreading.

Intel's Core Ultra X7 368H wins the tests that reward high per-core throughput and specific execution units. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3984 against 1857 is a 53.4% victory, and the PassMark single-thread score of 4005 against 3958 confirms a smaller but real edge in general single-threaded integer performance. Floating point math goes to Intel by 17.9%, likely reflecting the Panther Lake architecture's FP execution resources. Physics simulation favors Intel by 23.5%, which aligns with the FP advantage. Find prime numbers is a narrow Intel win at 5.3%.

The thermal design envelope difference is relevant context: AMD's chip carries a 55 W TDP while Intel's is rated at 25 W. That means Intel achieves its single-core and floating point wins at less than half the power budget, while AMD's multithreaded dominance comes at a higher sustained power cost. The recorded data does not include power efficiency figures per benchmark, but the TDP gap is a structural fact that explains part of the performance split.

The Verdict

The data points to two different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX is a high-throughput part built around 12 cores, 24 threads, and a 5.10 GHz boost clock on a 5 nm TSMC process. Its 64 MB shared L3 cache and 83.2 GB/s dual-channel DDR5 memory bandwidth support sustained parallel workloads. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H uses 16 cores but only 16 threads, meaning no simultaneous multithreading; it compensates with a 5.00 GHz boost clock, a 3 nm Intel process, 153.6 GB/s LPDDR5X bandwidth, and a much higher per-core cache allocation at 2.5 MB L2 per core.

For multithreaded integer workloads, compression, encryption, and general data processing, the Ryzen 7 8840HX is the clear selection based on benchmark results. Its 66.3% integer math lead and 58.6% compression advantage are decisive. For single-core performance, floating point math, and physics simulation, the Core Ultra X7 368H is the better choice, with a 53.4% Cinebench single-core margin that dwarfs anything AMD offers in that domain.

The 55 W TDP of the AMD chip versus 25 W for Intel matters for mobile system design. A laptop using the Ryzen 7 8840HX will need more robust cooling and a larger battery to sustain the same usage time. The Intel part achieves its wins at a lower power envelope, which could make it more suitable for thinner, lighter chassis. The AMD chip's socket is AMD Socket FL1, while Intel uses BGA 2540, so motherboard compatibility is not interchangeable. Neither chip offers ECC memory support, and both are marked as Active in production status.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmark tests overall?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H claims 7 wins against 6 for the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX out of 13 head-to-head comparisons.

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

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 3984 versus AMD's 1857, a 53.4% advantage. In PassMark single-thread, the gap narrows to 1.2% (4005 versus 3958).

Q: Where does the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX show its biggest advantage?

A: The largest AMD win is in PassMark integer math at 66.3% (146506 versus 88083), followed by data compression at 58.6% (496427 versus 312927).

Q: What is the core and thread configuration for each chip?

A: AMD uses 12 cores and 24 threads (with simultaneous multithreading). Intel uses 16 cores and 16 threads (no simultaneous multithreading).

Q: How do the memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: Intel's LPDDR5X support provides 153.6 GB/s, while AMD's DDR5 support provides 83.2 GB/s. Both use dual-channel memory buses.

Q: What process nodes are used?

A: AMD is built on TSMC's 5 nm process with 13,140 million transistors across a 2x 71 mm² die. Intel uses its own 3 nm process; the database does not list transistor count or die size for the Intel part.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two mobile processors is substantial. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX uses Zen 4 architecture under the Dragon Range codename, part of the 8000 series. It is built on a 5 nm TSMC process with 13,140 million transistors split across two 71 mm² dies. The cache hierarchy starts with 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and a 64 MB shared L3 pool. That large L3 is a key asset for workloads that reuse data across threads.

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H uses Panther Lake architecture, part of Core Ultra Series 3. It is built on Intel's 3 nm process, though the database does not record transistor count or die size. Cache allocation is very different: 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and only 18 MB shared L3. The much larger L2 per core likely explains part of Intel's single-thread advantage, as frequently accessed data stays closer to the execution cores.

Core counts differ as well. AMD provides 12 cores and 24 threads, enabling two threads per physical core. Intel provides 16 cores but only 16 threads, forgoing simultaneous multithreading entirely. That decision shows up in the multithread benchmark where AMD leads by 26.6%, despite Intel having four more physical cores. The extra threads on AMD allow better utilization of execution resources during parallel workloads.

Clock speeds are close but not identical. AMD has a 2.90 GHz base clock and 5.10 GHz boost. Intel has a 2.00 GHz base clock and 5.00 GHz boost. The lower base clock on Intel is offset by a significantly lower 25 W TDP versus AMD's 55 W. The boost clocks are nearly identical, yet Intel's single-core Cinebench score is 53.4% higher, indicating architectural efficiency rather than clock advantage.

Memory support diverges sharply. AMD uses DDR5 at 83.2 GB/s. Intel uses LPDDR5X at 153.6 GB/s, nearly double the bandwidth. That bandwidth advantage likely contributes to Intel's floating point and physics wins, which can be memory-bound. PCIe support also differs: AMD offers Gen 5 with 28 lanes from the CPU, while Intel offers Gen 5 with only 4 lanes from the CPU.

Integrated graphics differ as well. AMD pairs the CPU with Radeon 610M graphics. Intel integrates Arc B390 graphics. The database does not include graphics benchmarks, so the performance comparison is limited to CPU workloads. Neither chip supports ECC memory, and both are currently in Active production status. AMD's multiplier is unlocked, while Intel's is locked. Release dates show AMD shipping on 2025-04-22 and Intel on 2026-01-04, making Intel the newer design by several months.