AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data presents a clear and unambiguous picture: the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 wins every single recorded benchmark in the comparison. Across 15 head-to-head tests, the Intel processor takes all 15 victories, while the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS records zero wins. This is not a close contest with trade-offs between different workload types; the Intel part dominates in both single-threaded and multi-threaded performance.

The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS, despite being a capable mobile processor, does not have a single workload category where it outperforms the Intel Core Ultra 9 285. The closest margin comes in single-threaded PassMark testing, where the Intel chip leads by 24.4%. Every other benchmark shows a substantially larger gap, with the Intel processor leading by margins ranging from 43.4% to 81.7%.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 sits in the 95th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS sits in the 87th percentile. The average benchmark score for the Intel processor is 75,488, compared to 39,603 for the AMD part. This places the Intel chip in a higher performance tier entirely, closer to server-class EPYC processors than to the AMD mobile chip.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has 24 cores and 24 threads. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What is the difference in single-core performance?

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 scores 6,909, which is 75% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS's score of 1,724. In PassMark single-thread testing, the Intel chip leads by 24.4%, with scores of 4,881 versus 3,692.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 48,945, which is 69.8% higher than the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS's 14,784. The PassMark multi-thread score shows a 52.9% advantage for Intel, at 56,602 versus 26,646.

Q: What are the maximum clock speeds?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 boosts to 5.60 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS boosts to 5.10 GHz. The base clocks are 2.50 GHz for Intel and 3.30 GHz for AMD.

Q: Which processor is more power efficient?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS has a TDP of 28 watts, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has a TDP of 65 watts. The AMD part is designed for mobile systems with lower power envelopes.

Q: What is the process node for each processor?

A: Both processors are manufactured by TSMC, but on different nodes. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS uses a 4 nm process, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 uses a 3 nm process.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest performance gap between the two processors appears in the PassMark find prime numbers test. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 scores 459, which is 81.7% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS's score of 84. This is a dramatic difference and reflects the substantial computational advantage of the Intel chip in this integer-heavy workload.

The Cinebench R23 multi-core benchmark shows a 69.8% advantage for the Intel processor, with scores of 48,945 versus 14,784. This aligns with the core count disparity: the Intel chip has 24 cores compared to the AMD chip's 8 cores, even though the AMD part supports simultaneous multithreading with 16 threads. The Intel processor's 24 threads match its core count, yet still deliver nearly triple the multi-core score.

Floating-point math performance shows a 71.4% gap, with the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 scoring 194,988 versus the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS's 55,739. Data compression testing shows a 48.3% Intel advantage, at 602,121 versus 311,199. Data encryption shows a 59.9% gap, with Intel at 46,949 and AMD at 18,838. Extended instruction testing shows a 50.8% difference, with Intel at 45,357 and AMD at 22,298.

The physics benchmark shows a 62.5% Intel lead, with scores of 3,598 versus 1,351. Random string sorting shows a 48.5% gap, at 73,651 versus 37,922. Integer math shows the smallest multi-threaded gap at 43.4%, with Intel at 164,869 and AMD at 93,342.

Single-threaded performance is closer but still favors Intel decisively. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Intel chip scores 696 versus 271.5 for AMD, a 61% gap. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the gap widens to 75%, with scores of 6,909 and 1,724. The PassMark single-thread test shows the smallest overall margin at 24.4%, with Intel at 4,881 and AMD at 3,692.

The Cinebench R15 multi-core test shows a 50.2% Intel advantage, with scores of 4,933 versus 2,458. Across all benchmark categories, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 maintains a commanding lead, with no test where the AMD processor comes within even a quarter of the Intel score.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ fundamentally in their specifications. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has 24 cores and 24 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel part operates at a base clock of 2.50 GHz and boosts to 5.60 GHz. The AMD part has a higher base clock at 3.30 GHz but a lower boost clock at 5.10 GHz.

Thermal design power differs substantially: the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 is rated at 65 watts, while the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS is rated at 28 watts. This reflects their different market segments: the Intel chip is a desktop processor, while the AMD chip is a mobile processor. The AMD part uses an AMD Socket FP7, while the Intel part uses an Intel Socket 1851. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Memory bandwidth favors the Intel chip at 102.4 GB/s, compared to 89.6 GB/s for the AMD part. Both support DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, and both support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity differs: the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only).

The integrated graphics differ as well. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS includes a Radeon 780M, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 includes an Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The release dates are separated by several months: the AMD chip launched in April 2024, while the Intel chip launched in December 2024. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has a launch MSRP of $579.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS is built on the Zen 4 architecture with the Hawk Point codename, part of the 8000 series. It uses TSMC's 4 nm process node and contains 25,000 million transistors on a die size of 178 mm². The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 uses the Arrow Lake architecture with the Arrow Lake-S codename, part of the Core Ultra Series 2. It uses TSMC's 3 nm process node and contains 17,800 million transistors on a larger die size of 243 mm².

Cache structures differ significantly between the two. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel chip's larger per-core caches and larger shared L3 cache contribute to its performance advantage, particularly in workloads that benefit from larger working sets.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 uses a hybrid core arrangement typical of Arrow Lake, with 24 cores and 24 threads, meaning no hyperthreading. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS, with 8 cores and 16 threads, uses simultaneous multithreading to achieve its thread count. The database records the Intel chip's generation as Ultra 9 (Arrow Lake) and the AMD chip's generation as Ryzen 7 (Zen 4 (Hawk Point)).

The transistor counts are notable: the AMD chip packs more transistors (25,000 million) into a smaller die (178 mm²), while the Intel chip uses fewer transistors (17,800 million) on a larger die (243 mm²). This reflects the different design philosophies and the newer 3 nm process available to the Intel part. The 3 nm node provides a density advantage that, combined with the larger die, enables the Intel chip's higher core count and larger cache pools.