AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX vs Intel Core Ultra X9 388H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data splits these two mobile processors into distinct performance profiles. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX wins 7 of the 13 head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H takes 6. The margin of victory, however, tells a more nuanced story than the raw win count.

The largest single victory belongs to AMD in PassMark integer math. The Ryzen 7 8840HX scores 146,506 against 90,882 for the Intel part, a dominant 61.2% advantage. This is the clearest performance gap in the entire dataset. Data compression follows a similar pattern, with AMD at 496,427 versus 361,763, a 37.2% lead. Random string sorting also favors AMD by a substantial 31.7% margin (57,971 vs 44,010). These three results indicate that the AMD processor has a pronounced edge in workloads that rely on rapid, repeated integer operations and data manipulation.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ryzen 7 8840HX posts 25,265 points compared to 18,911 for the Core Ultra X9 388H, a 33.6% difference. This aligns with the PassMark multi-thread result, where AMD wins 41,732 to 36,811, a 13.4% margin. The AMD chip also leads in extended instructions (36,527 vs 29,943, a 22% gain) and data encryption (29,919 vs 28,490, a modest 5% edge).

The Intel processor counters with its own set of victories, most notably in floating-point math. The Core Ultra X9 388H scores 112,550 against 86,747 for AMD, a 22.9% advantage. Physics simulation also goes decisively to Intel, with 3,226 points versus 2,185, a 32.3% lead. In prime number finding, Intel wins 358 to 304, a 15.1% margin.

Single-thread performance belongs to Intel. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core Ultra X9 388H scores 2,200.5 against 1,857 for the Ryzen, a 15.6% advantage. The PassMark single-thread test confirms this with 4,280 versus 3,958, a 7.5% lead for Intel.

The average benchmark score places the AMD part at 71,797, while the Intel part sits at 44,466. That gap reflects the fact that the AMD CPU scores higher in more of the heavier multi-threaded workloads. The percentile ranking also favors AMD, which sits at the 94th percentile against all CPUs, while Intel lands at the 88th percentile.

Comparing to their nearest rivals in the database, the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX sits within 0.8% of the Intel Xeon 6724P and Intel Xeon 6517P, and within 0.2% of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF. The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is effectively tied with the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D at a 0.2% delta and sits within 0.5% of the Intel Core i5-13600.

Architecture Differences

The two processors take fundamentally different design approaches. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX uses the Zen 4 architecture under the Dragon Range codename, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It packs 12 cores and 24 threads, relying on simultaneous multithreading to double its thread count. The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H uses the Panther Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process at Intel, with 16 cores and 16 threads. Intel does not use multithreading here, so its thread count matches its core count.

Cache configurations diverge sharply. The AMD chip provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a large 64 MB shared L3 pool. The Intel part offers 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, but only 18 MB of shared L3. The AMD processor compensates for its smaller per-core L1 and L2 with a much larger last-level cache, which likely contributes to its strong performance in data-heavy workloads like compression and integer math.

Memory support also differs. The Ryzen 7 8840HX uses DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with 83.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core Ultra X9 388H uses LPDDR5X over dual-channel with 153.6 GB/s, a significantly higher bandwidth figure. This memory bandwidth advantage may explain the Intel part's strong showing in floating-point math, which can scale with available memory throughput.

PCIe connectivity is another differentiator. The AMD processor exposes Gen 5 with 28 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel part provides Gen 5 with only 4 lanes. The AMD chip also has an unlocked multiplier, whereas the Intel part is locked. The transistor counts and die sizes are only recorded for the AMD side: 13,140 million transistors across a 2x 71 mm² die. No such figures are available for the Intel processor in the database.

Power envelopes differ substantially. The AMD part carries a 55 W TDP, while the Intel part is rated at 25 W. The Intel processor's lower power target is notable given that it still wins in single-thread and floating-point tests. Integrated graphics also differ: AMD uses the Radeon 610M, while Intel uses the Arc B390.

The socket and platform details differ as well. AMD uses Socket FL1, while Intel uses BGA 2540. The release dates are recorded as April 2025 for the AMD part and January 2026 for the Intel part. Neither processor has a launch MSRP listed, and neither supports ECC memory.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split based on workload type. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX is the stronger multi-threaded processor. Its 33.6% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 61.2% lead in integer math, and 37.2% lead in data compression make it the choice for heavily parallel compute tasks, content creation, and data processing. The 12-core, 24-thread configuration with 64 MB of L3 cache appears well suited to workloads that can use many threads and large caches.

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is the stronger single-thread and floating-point processor. Its 15.6% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core and 22.9% lead in floating-point math point to advantages in lightly threaded applications and scientific or simulation workloads. The 32.3% lead in physics simulation reinforces this pattern. The 16 cores without multithreading, combined with higher memory bandwidth at 153.6 GB/s, suggests a design aimed at efficiency per watt rather than raw parallel throughput.

The AMD processor's average benchmark score of 71,797 versus 44,466 for Intel, along with its 94th percentile ranking versus the 88th percentile, indicates that on aggregate the AMD part delivers more overall performance. The Intel part, however, achieves its results at a 25 W TDP compared to 55 W, so efficiency-minded users may prefer the Intel design.

Users who prioritize maximum multi-core throughput and integer-heavy tasks should look to the Ryzen 7 8840HX. Users who prioritize single-thread speed, floating-point performance, and lower power draw should look to the Core Ultra X9 388H.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX scores 25,265, which is 33.6% higher than the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H's 18,911.

Q: Which processor wins in single-thread performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H wins in both recorded single-thread tests. It scores 2,200.5 in Cinebench R23 single-core versus 1,857 for AMD, a 15.6% lead, and 4,280 in PassMark single-thread versus 3,958, a 7.5% lead.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H has 16 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H supports LPDDR5X with 153.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX supports DDR5 with 83.2 GB/s, roughly half the bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX has 64 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX is rated at 55 W. The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is rated at 25 W.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX wins in multi-threaded and integer-centric workloads. Its 61.2% lead in integer math is the standout result, followed by a 37.2% edge in data compression and a 31.7% edge in random string sorting. It also wins in extended instructions, data encryption, Cinebench R23 multi-core, and PassMark multi-thread. These results point to a processor that excels in code compilation, file archiving, database operations, and other tasks that stress integer execution and parallel scaling.

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H wins in floating-point and single-thread workloads. Its 32.3% lead in physics simulation and 22.9% lead in floating-point math are the largest margins on its side. It also wins in prime number finding by 15.1%, in Cinebench R23 single-core by 15.6%, and in PassMark single-thread by 7.5%. These results suggest strengths in scientific computing, physics engines, and applications that depend heavily on floating-point throughput and single-core responsiveness.

The overall performance picture shows the AMD part leading in aggregate score, average benchmark score, and percentile ranking. The Intel part counters with a much lower TDP and a 3 nm process node, indicating a design focused on efficiency. The choice between them depends entirely on whether the workload favors parallel integer throughput or single-thread floating-point speed.