AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS vs Intel Core i5-13600HX Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark split between the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS and the Intel Core i5-13600HX is not a clean division by workload type; it is a division by instruction character. The AMD part wins 14 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests, while Intel takes only 3. Yet those three Intel victories are not trivial leftovers; they cluster around specific mathematical workloads where the Intel architecture pulls ahead decisively.

The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS dominates the Cinebench family across the board, taking every multi-core and single-core render test with margins hovering near 4.9%. That consistency suggests a fundamental per-thread efficiency advantage rather than a core-count story, and the data bears this out: AMD wins single-core tests by nearly the same margin as multi-core tests. The AMD chip also leads in data compression by 4.6%, data encryption by 6.2%, random string sorting by 13.8%, and extended instructions by a striking 29%. These are workloads where the Zen 4 design's instruction handling appears to shine.

The Intel Core i5-13600HX wins in find prime numbers by 20.2%, floating point math by 16.5%, and physics by 23.3%. These are heavily arithmetic workloads, often relying on vector throughput and sustained FPU output. The pattern is clear: if the task is dominated by floating-point arithmetic loops, Intel's hybrid architecture takes over. If the task involves branching, encryption, sorting, or general rendering, AMD's more uniform core design responds better.

The average benchmark scores reinforce the overall picture, with AMD at 39325 versus Intel at 38261, a gap of roughly 2.8%. Both chips sit at the 86th percentile among all CPUs in the database, so this is a comparison within the same performance tier, not across tiers. The AMD part's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS at 39603 and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450 at 39485, while Intel's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 9 285H at 38312 and the Intel Core 9 270H at 38335. The two chips are close enough that workload selection matters more than raw class placement.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two mobile processors is substantial. AMD's Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS uses Zen 4 on a 4 nm TSMC process, with a die size of 178 mm² and 25,000 million transistors. Intel's Core i5-13600HX uses Raptor Lake on Intel's 10 nm process, with a die size of 257 mm². The process difference alone explains a great deal of the power and efficiency behavior observed in the benchmark results.

The core configurations diverge sharply. The AMD chip has 8 cores and 16 threads, a uniform design where every core is identical. The Intel chip has 14 cores and 20 threads, using Raptor Lake's hybrid architecture that mixes performance and efficiency cores. Despite having fewer cores, the AMD part still wins most multi-threaded benchmarks, which indicates that its per-core throughput compensates for the 6-core deficit. The base clocks tell a similar story: AMD starts at 3.80 GHz and boosts to 5.10 GHz, while Intel starts at 2.60 GHz and boosts to 4.80 GHz. The AMD chip holds a clock advantage at both ends of the range.

Cache layouts differ in structure and size. AMD allocates 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. Intel allocates 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. Intel's larger cache pool likely contributes to its floating-point wins, where larger working sets can stay resident. AMD's smaller but faster cache hierarchy appears better suited to the latency-sensitive workloads where it wins.

Memory support also diverges. AMD supports DDR5 only, with dual-channel memory and a rated bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, with no bandwidth figure recorded in the database. Both support ECC memory. PCIe capabilities differ as well: AMD offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU, while Intel offers Gen 5 with 20 lanes. The integrated graphics differ, with AMD using the Radeon 780M and Intel using UHD Graphics 770, though no graphics benchmarks are recorded in this comparison.

The TDP ratings place Intel at 55 watts versus AMD at 45 watts, a 10-watt gap that likely influences sustained performance in thin laptops. The Intel part is socketed in Intel BGA 1964, while AMD uses AMD Socket FP7. Intel's multiplier is unlocked; AMD's is not. Intel carries a launch MSRP of $284. Release dates differ by over a year: Intel launched on 2023-01-03, AMD on 2024-04-15.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results form the most consistent block of AMD wins. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS scores 24565 against Intel's 23422, a 4.9% margin. The single-core R23 test shows 3468 versus 3306, again 4.9%. This pattern repeats in R20 (10317 versus 9837 multi-core, 1456 versus 1388 single-core) and R15 (2476 versus 2360 multi-core, 349 versus 333 single-core). Every Cinebench test lands at 4.8% or 4.9% in AMD's favor, a remarkably uniform advantage that suggests a consistent architectural edge per clock.

The Passmark suite reveals where Intel fights back. The largest Intel win is in physics, where it scores 1810 against AMD's 1389, a 23.3% margin. Floating point math follows with 70618 versus 58965, a 16.5% edge. Find prime numbers goes to Intel at 109 versus 87, a 20.2% advantage. These three wins share a common theme: heavy, repetitive arithmetic where Intel's larger L3 cache and higher TDP can sustain throughput.

AMD's Passmark wins are more numerous but vary in size. Extended instructions show the biggest gap at 25434 versus 19720, a 29% blowout. Random string sorting goes 41867 versus 36783, a 13.8% win. Data encryption shows 20487 versus 19289, a 6.2% edge. Data compression lands at 343952 versus 328686, up 4.6%. Integer math is nearly tied at 97625 versus 97126, a razor-thin 0.5% AMD win. Multithread shows 28572 versus 28280, a 1% margin. Single-thread tests put AMD at 3762 versus 3684, a 2.1% lead.

The pattern across all 17 tests is instructive. AMD wins the tests that involve branching, encryption, sorting, and rendering. Intel wins the tests that involve pure arithmetic throughput. The extended instructions result is particularly telling: a 29% gap indicates that AMD's ISA implementation handles complex instruction sequences far more efficiently, while Intel's advantage in floating-point loops shows where its wider execution resources pay off.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmark tests overall?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS wins 14 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core i5-13600HX wins 3.

Q: What is the largest single benchmark margin in this comparison?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS leads by 29% in Passmark extended instructions, scoring 25434 against Intel's 19720.

Q: Where does the Intel Core i5-13600HX outperform the AMD chip?

A: Intel wins in Passmark physics (1810 versus 1389, a 23.3% margin), floating point math (70618 versus 58965, a 16.5% margin), and find prime numbers (109 versus 87, a 20.2% margin).

Q: How do the two chips compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS scores 24565 against Intel's 23422, a 4.9% advantage.

Q: Do both processors sit in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both are at the 86th percentile among all CPUs in the database. AMD's average benchmark score is 39325, while Intel's is 38261.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core i5-13600HX has 14 cores and 20 threads.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS boosts to 5.10 GHz, while the Intel Core i5-13600HX boosts to 4.80 GHz.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The AMD chip supports DDR5 only. The Intel chip supports both DDR4 and DDR5. Both use dual-channel memory buses and support ECC memory.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear but nuanced recommendation. For users whose workloads involve rendering, encryption, compression, sorting, or general productivity, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS is the stronger choice. It wins every Cinebench test by roughly 4.9%, dominates extended instructions by 29%, and takes data encryption by 6.2%. Its 8-core, 16-thread design with a 5.10 GHz boost clock delivers consistent single-thread and multi-thread performance despite a lower 45 watt TDP.

For users whose workloads are dominated by floating-point arithmetic, physics simulation, or prime number computation, the Intel Core i5-13600HX is the better pick. Its wins in physics (23.3%), floating point math (16.5%), and find prime numbers (20.2%) are decisive and not marginal. The 14-core, 20-thread hybrid design and 24 MB of shared L3 cache provide the resources these arithmetic-heavy tasks need, and the unlocked multiplier offers flexibility that the locked AMD part cannot match.

The average benchmark scores favor AMD at 39325 versus Intel's 38261, and AMD wins more than four times as many tests. The Intel chip's three wins, however, are large enough that users in specialized fields should not overlook it. The 10-watt TDP difference also matters: AMD achieves its wins at 45 watts, while Intel needs 55 watts to reach its results. For a mobile platform, that efficiency gap could translate into real differences in battery life and thermal behavior.

The verdict is straightforward. Choose the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS for general productivity, rendering, security workloads, and efficiency. Choose the Intel Core i5-13600HX for arithmetic-heavy scientific or simulation workloads where its floating-point and physics advantages dominate. Both sit at the 86th percentile, but they earn that position through different strengths.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS | Intel Core i5-13600HX |

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

| Cores | 8 | 14 |

| Threads | 16 | 20 |

| Base clock | 3.80 GHz | 2.60 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.10 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 55 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP7 | Intel BGA 1964 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Raptor Lake |

| Codename | Hawk Point | Raptor Lake-HX |

| Process node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die size | 178 mm² | 257 mm² |

| Transistors | 25,000 million | Not recorded |

| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 16 MB (shared) | 24 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | Not recorded |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon 780M | UHD Graphics 770 |

| Release date | 2024-04-15 | 2023-01-03 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $284 |

| Multiplier unlocked | No | Yes |