AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS vs Intel Core 7 360 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS records an average benchmark score of 39,325, while the Intel Core 7 360 scores 18,374. The AMD part sits at the 86th percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 72nd percentile for the Intel part.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap in Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS scores 24,565 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, versus 13,634 for the Intel Core 7 360. That is a 80.2% advantage for the AMD processor.

Q: Does the Intel Core 7 360 win any benchmark tests?

A: Yes, the Intel part wins three recorded tests: PassMark find prime numbers (120 vs 87, a 27.5% lead) and PassMark single-thread and single-thread duplicate scores (both 4,274 vs 3,762, a 12% lead).

Q: What memory configurations does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS supports DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth and ECC memory. The Intel Core 7 360 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC support.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no hyperthreading or equivalent technology on the Intel side.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS has a TDP of 45 watts, while the Intel Core 7 360 has a TDP of 15 watts. This makes the Intel part a much lower-power design.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS is built on TSMC's 4 nm process and uses the Zen 4 architecture under the Hawk Point codename. It belongs to the 8000 series and the Ryzen 7 generation. The Intel Core 7 360 uses Intel's 3 nm process (an Intel foundry node) with the Wildcat Lake codename, placed in the Core 5 generation. The die size for the AMD part is 178 mm² with 25,000 million transistors; the Intel part has no recorded die size or transistor count in the database.

Core and cache configurations differ sharply. The AMD chip has 8 cores and 16 threads, with 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel chip has 6 cores and 6 threads, with 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and only 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part has no SMT, which explains its thread count matching its core count.

Memory architecture diverges as well. The AMD chip uses dual-channel DDR5 with ECC support and a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel chip supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X but only on a single-channel bus, with a lower bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s and no ECC. PCIe connectivity also differs: the AMD processor provides Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes, while the Intel processor provides Gen 4 with only 6 lanes.

Integrated graphics present another distinction. The AMD part carries a Radeon 780M, while the Intel part uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The AMD chip is unlocked for multipliers? No, it is not, and neither is the Intel part. The AMD chip uses an AMD Socket FP7, while the Intel chip uses Intel BGA 1516. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $426, while the AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results show a dominant AMD performance profile, but not a clean sweep. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS wins 14 of the 17 recorded comparisons, with the Intel Core 7 360 taking 3. The margin varies wildly by workload.

In Cinebench, the AMD part leads by 80.2% across R15 multi-core (2476 vs 1374), R15 single-core (349 vs 193), R20 multi-core (10317 vs 5726), R20 single-core (1456 vs 808), R23 multi-core (24565 vs 13634), and R23 single-core (3468 vs 1924). The consistency of the 80.2% delta across all six Cinebench tests is striking, suggesting a uniform per-thread and multi-thread advantage in that rendering workload.

PassMark integer math shows the largest AMD win: 97,625 vs 34,238, a 185.1% lead. Data compression also heavily favors AMD at 343,952 vs 142,877, a 140.7% difference, and random string sorting gives AMD a 137.4% advantage (41,867 vs 17,636). Extended instructions favor AMD by 105.3% (25,434 vs 12,390). Data encryption shows an 83.5% AMD lead (20,487 vs 11,164), and the multithread test shows an 83.8% lead (28,572 vs 15,544).

Floating point math is closer but still AMD-favored: 58,965 vs 44,963, a 31.1% edge. Physics shows a modest 14.5% AMD lead (1,389 vs 1,213).

The Intel part wins in two distinct areas. PassMark find prime numbers gives the Intel Core 7 360 a 27.5% advantage (120 vs 87). PassMark single-thread and the duplicate single-thread entry show the Intel part at 4,274 vs 3,762, a 12% lead. This single-thread victory is notable because the AMD part wins Cinebench single-core tests with an 80.2% margin. The discrepancy suggests the two benchmarks measure different aspects of single-thread performance, or the Intel part has a particular strength in the PassMark single-thread workload.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every recorded specification field. Core count: AMD has 8, Intel has 6. Thread count: AMD has 16, Intel has 6. Base clock: AMD runs at 3.80 GHz, Intel at 1.50 GHz. Boost clock: AMD reaches 5.10 GHz, Intel reaches 4.80 GHz. TDP: AMD is rated at 45 watts, Intel at 15 watts.

Cache structure: AMD uses 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3. Intel uses 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 6 MB shared L3. Memory support: AMD supports DDR5 only, Intel supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Memory bus: AMD is dual-channel, Intel is single-channel. Memory bandwidth: AMD at 89.6 GB/s, Intel at 59.7 GB/s. ECC: AMD supports it, Intel does not.

PCIe: AMD offers Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes, Intel offers Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics: AMD uses Radeon 780M, Intel uses Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe). Socket: AMD uses AMD Socket FP7, Intel uses Intel BGA 1516. Process node: AMD at 4 nm TSMC, Intel at 3 nm Intel. Codename: Hawk Point vs Wildcat Lake. Generation: Ryzen 7 (Zen 4, Hawk Point) vs Core 5 (Wildcat Lake). Release date: AMD on 2024-04-15, Intel on 2026-04-15. The AMD part has a part number of 100-000001316 (FP7r2) and 100-000001387 (FP7), while the Intel part has part number SAE3E.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to two very different design targets. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS is a high-performance mobile processor with 8 cores, 16 threads, a 45-watt TDP, dual-channel memory, and ECC support. It dominates most compute-heavy workloads in the database, with multi-core leads of 80% or more in Cinebench and triple-digit leads in PassMark integer math, data compression, and random string sorting.

The Intel Core 7 360 is a lower-power part at 15 watts, with fewer cores, no SMT, single-channel memory, and a smaller cache pool. Its recorded wins are narrower: a 27.5% lead in prime number finding and a 12% lead in PassMark single-thread. The Intel part also has a later release date (2026-04-15 versus 2024-04-15) and a stated launch MSRP of $426.

The AMD processor's 86th percentile ranking versus the Intel's 72nd percentile, combined with the average benchmark score gap (39,325 vs 18,374), indicates that for workloads where multi-threading, memory bandwidth, and cache capacity matter, the AMD part is the stronger choice. The Intel part's advantages are confined to specific single-threaded PassMark metrics and low-power operation.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS wins in rendering and content creation workloads. Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core and single-core tests all show an 80.2% advantage. The integer math result (185.1% lead) points to strong general-purpose CPU work. Data compression (140.7% lead) and random string sorting (137.4% lead) suggest advantages in file archiving, database operations, and text processing. Data encryption (83.5% lead) indicates a benefit for security-related workloads. Extended instructions (105.3% lead) covers SIMD-style operations. Floating point math (31.1% lead) and physics (14.5% lead) round out a broad compute advantage. The multithread test (83.8% lead) confirms the 8-core, 16-thread design delivers across parallel workloads.

The Intel Core 7 360 wins where single-thread PassMark performance and low TDP matter. Its 12% lead in PassMark single-thread (4,274 vs 3,762) is the only single-thread victory for Intel in the database, and its 27.5% lead in find prime numbers suggests a niche strength in certain iterative integer workloads. The 15-watt TDP, versus the AMD's 45 watts, makes the Intel part more suited to fanless or ultra-portable designs, though the database does not record any efficiency benchmark to quantify that trade-off. The single-channel memory and 6 MB L3 cache limit its performance in memory-bandwidth-sensitive tasks, as reflected in the large AMD leads in compression and sorting.