AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS vs Intel Xeon 6369P Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive overall win for the Intel Xeon 6369P, which takes 14 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS manages three wins, but the margin pattern reveals a clear split between raw throughput workloads and specialized instruction paths.

In the Cinebench suite, the Intel part is consistently ahead by a narrow but uniform 4.9% margin across all six tests. The multicore results show 2598 versus 2476 in R15, 10825 versus 10317 in R20, and 25774 versus 24565 in R23. The single-core results follow the same pattern: 366 versus 349 in R15, 1527 versus 1456 in R20, and 3638 versus 3468 in R23. This consistency suggests a clock-speed or per-core efficiency advantage that applies equally to lightly threaded and fully threaded workloads.

The PassMark suite tells a more varied story. The Intel Xeon 6369P posts its largest win in the find prime numbers test, scoring 141 against 87, a 62.1% advantage. The physics test also favors Intel heavily, with 2008 versus 1389, a 44.6% margin. Floating point math shows a 25.8% lead for Intel (74151 versus 58965). The multithread score is 30315 versus 28572, a 6.1% win, and integer math is closer at 101013 versus 97625, a 3.5% margin. Data compression is nearly tied, with Intel ahead by just 0.8% (346632 versus 343952).

The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS takes its three wins in specialized areas. Data encryption shows a 12.5% lead for AMD (20487 versus 17922). Extended instructions favor AMD by 10.3% (25434 versus 22807). Random string sorting goes to AMD by 11.1% (41867 versus 37237). These are not minor margins; they indicate a genuine architectural strength in specific instruction streams rather than noise in the measurement.

Single-thread performance is worth highlighting separately. The PassMark single-thread score gives Intel a 14.4% lead (4305 versus 3762), which is a larger gap than the Cinebench single-core tests suggest. This discrepancy between benchmark families indicates that the Intel core design responds differently to the PassMark workload pattern than to Cinebench's rendering-oriented instruction mix.

The average benchmark scores place the two processors close together in the overall database: Intel at 40327 and AMD at 39325. The Intel part sits at the 87th percentile of all CPUs, while AMD sits at the 86th. Both occupy similar territory in the rankings, but the head-to-head data shows that the Intel chip achieves its average through broader wins across more test types, while the AMD chip concentrates its advantages in fewer, specialized categories.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies. The Intel Xeon 6369P uses Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm process from Intel's own foundry, with a die size of 257 mm². The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS uses Zen 4 architecture on a 4 nm process from TSMC, with a die size of 178 mm² and 25,000 million transistors.

Both chips have 8 cores and 16 threads, so thread count is not a differentiator. The Intel part has higher clocks: a 3.30 GHz base and 5.70 GHz boost, compared to 3.80 GHz base and 5.10 GHz boost for AMD. The AMD chip has a higher base clock, but the Intel chip has a substantially higher boost ceiling. Power envelopes differ dramatically, with Intel rated at 95 W TDP and AMD at 45 W TDP.

Cache hierarchies are structured differently. Intel allocates 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. AMD allocates 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The Intel chip has more cache at every level, which likely contributes to its advantage in cache-sensitive workloads like the prime number and physics tests.

Memory support also differs. The Intel chip supports both DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, while the AMD chip supports only DDR5 over a dual-channel bus. The AMD part has a recorded memory bandwidth figure of 89.6 GB/s; no bandwidth figure is recorded for the Intel part. Both support ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity shows a generational split. The Intel Xeon 6369P provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS provides PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU. Intel's interface is newer in generation, but AMD offers more total lanes.

The integrated graphics situation is a major differentiator. The Intel Xeon 6369P has no integrated graphics (listed as N/A), while the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS includes a Radeon 780M iGPU. This makes the AMD part a complete system-on-chip solution for compact or mobile builds without a discrete GPU.

Market positioning and socket types reflect their intended uses. The Intel part targets the server and workstation segment, uses Intel Socket 1700, and belongs to the Xeon 6 generation with a Raptor Lake Refresh codename. The AMD part targets mobile, uses AMD Socket FP7, and belongs to the 8000 series with the Hawk Point codename. The Intel part was released on 2025-02-23, while the AMD part was released on 2024-04-15.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon 6369P wins in rendering workloads, as shown by the uniform 4.9% advantage across all Cinebench versions. This applies to both single-core and multicore rendering, making it the stronger choice for CPU-based render tasks, video encoding pipelines that rely on the same instruction paths, and any workload that stresses the full core complex with floating-point math.

The physical simulation category strongly favors Intel. The 44.6% lead in the PassMark physics test and the 62.1% lead in find prime numbers indicate that the Intel architecture handles iterative integer loops and physics calculations with significantly greater efficiency. The 25.8% floating point math advantage reinforces this pattern: scientific computing, engineering simulation, and numerical analysis workloads would all benefit from the Intel part.

The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS wins in data security and encryption workloads. The 12.5% lead in data encryption suggests that the Zen 4 architecture has a more efficient cryptographic instruction path. The 10.3% lead in extended instructions points to advantages in AVX-512 or similar extended instruction sets, which would matter for compression algorithms, some scientific workloads, and certain database operations. The 11.1% lead in random string sorting indicates better performance in text processing, sorting algorithms, and data manipulation tasks that involve non-sequential memory access patterns.

For single-threaded general performance, the PassMark single-thread score gives Intel a 14.4% lead, but the Cinebench single-core scores show only a 4.9% gap. The interpretation depends on workload type: the Intel chip has a clear single-thread edge in the PassMark pattern, while the two are closer in rendering-oriented single-thread tasks.

The Intel part also wins the multithread test by 6.1% and data compression by 0.8%, though the compression margin is small enough to be considered effectively tied. The integer math advantage of 3.5% is real but modest.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear recommendation for the Intel Xeon 6369P for most compute-heavy workloads. It dominates in rendering, physics, floating point, prime number computation, and overall multithreaded throughput. The 14 wins out of 17 head-to-head comparisons, combined with the 87th percentile ranking versus the 86th for AMD, establishes it as the stronger compute processor in this pairing.

The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS is the better choice when three specific factors matter: encryption and security workloads, extended instruction set performance, and random string sorting. The 12.5% encryption lead and 10.3% extended instructions lead are substantial enough to matter in dedicated security appliances or database servers that process large volumes of encrypted data.

The power envelope difference also matters for deployment decisions. The AMD part has a 45 W TDP against 95 W for Intel, making it suitable for thermally constrained environments, mobile chassis, or systems where power consumption is a primary constraint. The integrated Radeon 780M graphics on the AMD part eliminate the need for a discrete GPU in basic display and media tasks, which the Intel part cannot do without additional hardware.

For server and workstation deployments where rendering, simulation, or general compute density is the priority, the Intel Xeon 6369P is the data-backed choice. For mobile workstations or compact systems where encryption throughput, extended instruction performance, and lower power draw matter more, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS has clear advantages. The Intel launch MSRP is $606; no launch MSRP is recorded for the AMD part.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Xeon 6369P has a boost clock of 5.70 GHz, compared to 5.10 GHz for the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS.

Q: How much faster is the Intel chip in the PassMark physics test?

A: The Intel Xeon 6369P scores 2008 in the physics test versus 1389 for the AMD chip, a 44.6% advantage.

Q: Does either processor include integrated graphics?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS includes a Radeon 780M iGPU. The Intel Xeon 6369P has no integrated graphics.

Q: In which benchmarks does the AMD chip outperform the Intel chip?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS wins in data encryption (20487 versus 17922, a 12.5% lead), extended instructions (25434 versus 22807, a 10.3% lead), and random string sorting (41867 versus 37237, an 11.1% lead).

Q: What is the difference in power consumption between the two?

A: The Intel Xeon 6369P is rated at 95 W TDP, while the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS is rated at 45 W TDP.

Q: How do the two compare in the Cinebench R23 multicore test?

A: The Intel Xeon 6369P scores 25774, and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS scores 24565, giving Intel a 4.9% advantage.