AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS vs Intel Xeon Phi 7210 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep: the AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS wins 15 of the 15 shared benchmark comparisons, with the Intel Xeon Phi 7210 registering zero wins. The margins, however, vary dramatically by workload type, revealing the distinct design philosophies of the two processors.

The largest single-threaded gap appears in PassMark single-thread testing, where the AMD scores 3738 against the Intel's 460, a delta of 712.6%. Cinebench R15 single-core tells a similar story: AMD at 276 versus Intel at 88, a 213.6% advantage. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 1769 versus 876, a 101.9% lead. These results indicate that for any latency-sensitive, lightly threaded task, the Ryzen 7 8845HS is in a completely different performance class.

In multi-threaded workloads, the picture becomes more nuanced. The AMD still wins, but the margins shrink in certain tests. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows AMD at 16192 versus Intel at 6210, a 160.7% lead. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 2575 versus 625, a 312% advantage. PassMark multi-thread shows 28498 versus 7306, a 290.1% gap. These are large wins, but note that the Xeon Phi 7210, with its 64 cores and 256 threads, is competitive in some specific throughput tasks.

The closest contest is PassMark data compression: AMD scores 344439, Intel scores 332960, a mere 3.4% difference. This near-tie suggests that the Xeon Phi's massive thread count can nearly offset the architectural advantages of the Ryzen in certain parallel data-streaming workloads. PassMark integer math shows a 15.2% lead for AMD (97747 versus 84874), another relatively modest margin given the core count disparity.

The most extreme deltas appear in encryption and prime number finding. PassMark data encryption shows AMD at 20416 versus Intel at 3455, a 490.9% advantage. PassMark find prime numbers shows 87 versus 10, a 770% gap. PassMark physics shows 1347 versus 198, a 580.3% lead. Random string sorting shows 41446 versus 8956, a 362.8% difference. These results point to the AMD's far superior per-core efficiency and modern instruction handling.

Floating-point math is another area where the AMD dominates: 59254 versus 29356, a 101.8% lead. Extended instructions show 25642 versus 18359, a 39.7% advantage. In every measured category, the Ryzen 7 8845HS finishes ahead, but the closest margins (data compression, integer math, extended instructions) are precisely where the Xeon Phi's many cores provide partial compensation for its older architecture.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design eras and purposes. The AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS is built on the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Hawk Point, using a 4 nm process from TSMC. It integrates 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The Intel Xeon Phi 7210 uses the Knights Landing architecture, also its codename, fabricated on Intel's 14 nm process with 8,000 million transistors; the die size is not recorded in the database.

Core and thread counts differ enormously. The AMD has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel has 64 cores and 256 threads. Clock speeds tell the opposite story: the AMD has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, whereas the Intel runs at 1.30 GHz base and 1.50 GHz boost. The TDP reflects this: AMD at 45 watts versus Intel at 215 watts.

Cache hierarchies are also divergent. The AMD provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel provides 32 KB of L1 per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, with no L3 cache listed. Memory support shows AMD using DDR5 with dual-channel configuration and a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the Intel uses DDR4 with no recorded bus configuration or bandwidth figure. The AMD does not support ECC memory; the Intel does.

Sockets and market positioning differ completely. The AMD uses AMD Socket FP8, is classified as a mobile processor, and includes integrated Radeon 780M graphics. The Intel uses Intel Socket 3647, is classified as server/workstation, and has no integrated graphics listed. The AMD supports PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only); the Intel has no PCIe data recorded. The AMD was released on December 5, 2023, and is listed as active in production. The Intel was released on June 19, 2016, with no production status recorded. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. Both processors share the same 81st percentile ranking against all CPUs in the database, and their average benchmark scores are close: 29955 for AMD versus 29245 for Intel.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon Phi 7210 has 64 cores and 256 threads, compared to the AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS's 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Why does the AMD win so decisively in single-threaded tests?

A: The AMD's boost clock of 5.10 GHz, compared to the Intel's 1.50 GHz, explains the 712.6% advantage in PassMark single-thread testing. The AMD's modern Zen 4 architecture also contributes to its per-core efficiency.

Q: Is the Intel competitive in any benchmark?

A: The closest result is PassMark data compression, where the Intel scores 332960 against the AMD's 344439, a difference of only 3.4%. This suggests the Intel's 256 threads can nearly match the AMD in specific parallel data-streaming tasks.

Q: What are the memory differences?

A: The AMD supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel supports DDR4 with no recorded bus or bandwidth data. The AMD does not support ECC memory, while the Intel does.

Q: Which processor is newer?

A: The AMD was released on December 5, 2023, and is listed as active. The Intel was released on June 19, 2016, with no production status recorded.

Q: Do both processors have the same performance ranking?

A: Yes, both hold the 81st percentile against all CPUs, and their average benchmark scores are close: 29955 for AMD versus 29245 for Intel. However, the head-to-head results show the AMD winning all 15 shared tests.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two processors:

• Cores: 8 (AMD) versus 64 (Intel)
• Threads: 16 (AMD) versus 256 (Intel)
• Base Clock: 3.80 GHz (AMD) versus 1.30 GHz (Intel)
• Boost Clock: 5.10 GHz (AMD) versus 1.50 GHz (Intel)
• TDP: 45 watts (AMD) versus 215 watts (Intel)
• Socket: AMD Socket FP8 (AMD) versus Intel Socket 3647 (Intel)
• Architecture: Zen 4 (AMD) versus Knights Landing (Intel)
• Process Node: 4 nm (AMD) versus 14 nm (Intel)
• Transistors: 25,000 million (AMD) versus 8,000 million (Intel)
• L1 Cache: 64 KB per core (AMD) versus 32 KB per core (Intel)
• L2 Cache: 1 MB per core (AMD) versus 512 KB per core (Intel)
• L3 Cache: 16 MB shared (AMD) versus none listed (Intel)
• Memory Support: DDR5 (AMD) versus DDR4 (Intel)
• Memory Bus: Dual-channel (AMD) versus not listed (Intel)
• Memory Bandwidth: 89.6 GB/s (AMD) versus not listed (Intel)
• ECC Memory: false (AMD) versus true (Intel)
• PCIe: Gen 4, 20 Lanes CPU only (AMD) versus not listed (Intel)
• Integrated Graphics: Radeon 780M (AMD) versus none (Intel)
• Market Segment: Mobile (AMD) versus Server/Workstation (Intel)
• Production Status: Active (AMD) versus not listed (Intel)
• Release Date: December 5, 2023 (AMD) versus June 19, 2016 (Intel)
• Part Number: 100-000001322, 100-000001384, 100-000001311 (AMD) versus SR2ME, SR2X4 (Intel)

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents an unambiguous picture. The AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS outperforms the Intel Xeon Phi 7210 in every shared test, with margins ranging from a narrow 3.4% in data compression to a massive 712.6% in single-thread performance. The AMD's modern 4 nm Zen 4 architecture, high clock speeds, and efficient 45-watt TDP deliver superior results across all recorded workloads.

The Intel Xeon Phi 7210, despite having 8 times the cores and 16 times the threads, cannot overcome its 14 nm Knights Landing architecture, low 1.30 GHz base clock, and 215-watt power draw. Its only near-competitive result is in data compression, where the high thread count partially compensates for architectural age.

For any user choosing between these two, the data directs toward the AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS. It wins every benchmark, uses less power, supports newer memory standards, and operates with a far higher clock speed. The Intel's only advantages are ECC memory support and a server/workstation market classification, but these do not translate into any measured performance win.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS wins in every measured category. Its biggest strengths are in single-threaded and lightly threaded workloads: PassMark single-thread (712.6% ahead), PassMark physics (580.3% ahead), and PassMark data encryption (490.9% ahead). These results make it the clear choice for general computing, application responsiveness, and any task that depends on per-core speed.

The AMD also dominates in multi-threaded synthetic tests: PassMark multi-thread (290.1% ahead), Cinebench R23 multi-core (160.7% ahead), and Cinebench R15 multi-core (312% ahead). This indicates that even with far fewer cores, the AMD's architectural efficiency and high clock speeds deliver superior parallel performance in most scenarios.

The Intel Xeon Phi 7210's closest performance comes in PassMark data compression, where it trails by only 3.4%. This suggests that in highly parallel, memory-streaming tasks where the 256 threads can be fully utilized, the Intel can approach the AMD's performance. PassMark integer math (15.2% gap) and extended instructions (39.7% gap) are other areas where the Intel's core count narrows the deficit.

However, no recorded benchmark shows the Intel winning. The AMD's wins span every category: compression, encryption, instruction handling, prime number finding, floating-point math, integer math, multi-thread performance, physics, random string sorting, and single-thread performance. The data supports the AMD as the superior processor for all tested workloads, with the Intel's many cores providing only partial mitigation in specific throughput-oriented tasks.