AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225T Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T and AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS represent two fundamentally different approaches to modern computing: one is a desktop-focused, high-efficiency Arrow Lake part, while the other is a mobile Hawk Point APU with a strong integrated GPU. Benchmark data reveals a surprisingly close overall contest, with the Intel chip winning 8 of 15 head-to-head tests and the AMD chip taking 7, yet the nature of those victories tells a clear story about intended use cases. The Intel part excels in single-threaded and floating-point workloads, while the AMD part dominates in integer-heavy and multi-threaded tasks. This is not a simple "which is faster" question; it is a question of which workload profile matches your needs.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T leads in single-threaded tests. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 3101 versus 1769 for the AMD, a 75.3% advantage. PassMark single-thread results also favor Intel, with 4348 versus 3738, a 16.3% lead.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS have a multi-threading advantage?

A: Yes, in several tests. The AMD scores 2575 versus 2214 in Cinebench R15 multi-core (14% higher) and 28498 versus 25358 in PassMark multi-thread (11% higher). However, the Intel chip wins the more modern Cinebench R23 multi-core test with 21971 versus 16192, a 35.7% lead.

Q: Which CPU is better for data compression and encryption workloads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS is clearly ahead. It scores 344439 versus 233998 in PassMark data compression (32.1% higher) and 20416 versus 18289 in data encryption (10.4% higher).

Q: What is the difference in process node and transistor count?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T is built on a 3 nm process with 17,800 million transistors and a 243 mm² die. The AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS uses a 4 nm process with 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die.

Q: Which CPU offers better floating-point performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T is significantly stronger. In PassMark floating-point math, it scores 82751 versus 59254 for the AMD, a 39.7% advantage. It also wins PassMark physics with 2053 versus 1347, a 52.4% lead.

Q: How do these CPUs compare in overall benchmark averages?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T has an average benchmark score of 30468, placing it in the 82nd percentile of all CPUs. The AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS averages 29955, placing it in the 81st percentile. The Intel chip’s nearest rival is the Intel Core i5-13600H at 30548 (-0.3% delta), while the AMD’s nearest rival is itself, the Ryzen 7 7840HS, with a 0% delta.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T is built on the Arrow Lake-S architecture, using a 3 nm process from TSMC. It features 10 cores and 10 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. Its cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3. The chip supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. It uses Intel Socket 1851 and has a TDP of 65 W. Integrated graphics are handled by an Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 16EU unit. The PCIe interface is Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU.

The AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS is a Zen 4 part, codenamed Hawk Point, manufactured on a 4 nm TSMC process. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The cache setup is 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. It also supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, but with a lower bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The socket is AMD Socket FP8, and the TDP is 45 W. The integrated GPU is the Radeon 780M. PCIe support is Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU.

A key difference lies in thread execution: the Intel chip runs 10 threads on 10 cores, while the AMD chip runs 16 threads on 8 cores via simultaneous multithreading. The Intel part has a larger L3 cache (20 MB vs 16 MB) and significantly more L2 per core (3 MB vs 1 MB). The AMD chip has a higher base and boost clock, but the Intel chip’s newer process node and architecture deliver higher instructions per clock in several workloads. The Intel chip’s memory bandwidth is also higher, which can benefit certain compute-heavy tasks. Both CPUs lack ECC memory support and have locked multipliers.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the benchmark suite is Cinebench R23 multi-core, where Intel wins decisively. The Core Ultra 5 225T scores 21971, while the Ryzen 7 8845HS scores 16192, a 35.7% lead for Intel. This is a modern, heavily threaded test, and the Intel chip’s newer architecture clearly scales better. In single-core R23, Intel’s margin is even larger: 3101 versus 1769, a 75.3% advantage. This is a massive gap that indicates the Zen 4 cores in the AMD chip are not competing at the same level per-thread.

However, the AMD chip fights back in legacy multi-threaded tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, AMD wins 2575 versus 2214, a 14% margin. PassMark multi-thread also goes to AMD, with 28498 versus 25358, an 11% lead. These older tests may not utilize the Intel chip’s architectural advantages as effectively. The AMD chip also dominates integer-heavy workloads. PassMark integer math shows a 39.1% lead for AMD (97747 versus 59543), and PassMark random string sorting goes to AMD by 30.6% (41446 versus 28774). Data compression is another AMD victory, with 344439 versus 233998, a 32.1% delta.

Intel’s wins are concentrated in specific compute areas. PassMark find prime numbers is a blowout for Intel: 284 versus 87, a 226.4% advantage. Floating-point math also favors Intel strongly, with 82751 versus 59254, a 39.7% lead. PassMark physics shows Intel ahead by 52.4% (2053 versus 1347). In PassMark data encryption, AMD wins narrowly by 10.4%, and in extended instructions, AMD wins by 21.7%. The single-thread PassMark results give Intel a 16.3% edge, consistent with the Cinebench R23 single-core outcome. The overall win count is 8 for Intel and 7 for AMD, but the margins tell the real story: Intel’s wins are often larger in percentage terms, especially in prime numbers and floating-point.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split based on workload. If your priority is single-threaded responsiveness, floating-point math, or physics simulations, the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T is the stronger choice. Its 75.3% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core and 39.7% lead in floating-point math are not marginal; they represent a generational leap in per-core efficiency. The 226.4% advantage in prime number finding is extraordinary and suggests a particular strength in certain algorithmic tasks.

If your work is heavily integer-based, involves data compression, or benefits from higher thread counts in legacy applications, the AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS is the better option. Its 39.1% lead in integer math and 32.1% lead in data compression are substantial. The AMD chip also offers a lower TDP of 45 W versus 65 W, which may be relevant for thermal-constrained systems, though the Intel chip’s higher memory bandwidth could offset some of that in memory-bound tasks.

For a desktop builder, the Intel chip’s socket and 65 W TDP make it a straightforward choice for a capable air-cooled system. For a laptop or compact mobile platform, the AMD chip’s 45 W TDP and integrated Radeon 780M graphics are more aligned with portable use. The Intel chip’s 82nd percentile ranking versus AMD’s 81st is a negligible overall difference, but the distribution of wins is not. Pick Intel for raw single-core and floating-point power; pick AMD for integer throughput and data-heavy workloads.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Core Ultra 5 225T | AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS |

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

| Cores | 10 | 8 |

| Threads | 10 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.50 GHz | 3.80 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.90 GHz | 5.10 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 45 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1851 | AMD Socket FP8 |

| Architecture | Arrow Lake | Zen 4 (Hawk Point) |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 4 nm |

| Transistors | 17,800 million | 25,000 million |

| Die Size | 243 mm² | 178 mm² |

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

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

| L3 Cache (shared) | 20 MB | 16 MB |

| Memory Bandwidth | 102.4 GB/s | 89.6 GB/s |

| PCIe Version | Gen 5 | Gen 4 |

| Integrated Graphics | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 16EU | Radeon 780M |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

Where Each One Wins

Intel Core Ultra 5 225T Wins:

• Single-threaded performance: Cinebench R23 single-core (3101 vs 1769) and PassMark single-thread (4348 vs 3738) are both Intel victories, with the R23 gap being particularly large.
• Floating-point compute: PassMark floating-point math (82751 vs 59254) shows a 39.7% Intel advantage, making it suited for scientific or simulation workloads.
• Physics and prime number tasks: PassMark physics (2053 vs 1347) and find prime numbers (284 vs 87) are dominant Intel wins, indicating strong algorithmic efficiency.
• Modern multi-core scaling: Cinebench R23 multi-core (21971 vs 16192) is a clear Intel win, despite the AMD chip winning older multi-threaded tests.

AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS Wins:

• Integer-heavy workloads: PassMark integer math (97747 vs 59543) and random string sorting (41446 vs 28774) are substantial AMD victories.
• Data compression and encryption: PassMark data compression (344439 vs 233998) and encryption (20416 vs 18289) favor AMD, making it suitable for file archiving and security tasks.
• Legacy multi-threading: Cinebench R15 multi-core (2575 vs 2214) and PassMark multi-thread (28498 vs 25358) go to AMD, showing strength in older thread-heavy applications.
• Extended instruction sets: PassMark extended instructions (25642 vs 20083) is an AMD win, useful for media encoding or similar tasks.