AMD Ryzen 9 7845HX vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265T Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265T and AMD Ryzen 9 7845HX land in nearly the same overall position in the database, with average benchmark scores of 47,697 versus 46,654 and percentile ranks of 90 and 89 respectively, yet they get there through opposite strengths. The Ryzen 9 7845HX, a 12-core, 24-thread mobile Dragon Range part, dominates sustained multi-threaded throughput. The Core Ultra 7 265T, a 20-core, 20-thread desktop Arrow Lake chip with a 35 W TDP, crushes every single-threaded measure in the recorded data. The head-to-head record splits nearly down the middle at 8 wins for AMD and 7 for Intel, and which one is "better" depends entirely on workload shape.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single most lopsided result in the entire dataset belongs to Intel. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core Ultra 7 265T scores 4,455 against 1,852 for the Ryzen 9 7845HX, a 140.6% advantage. That gap is not a rounding artifact; it is a generational difference in per-core responsiveness under this test. Cinebench R15 single-core points the same direction, with Intel ahead 449 to 295, a 52.2% margin. PassMark single-thread is closer but still decisive for Intel: 4,338 versus 3,935, a 10.2% lead. Across every single-threaded measurement in the database, the 265T wins without exception.

AMD's counterattack is concentrated in integer and memory-bound throughput. PassMark integer math goes to the 7845HX by 32.3% (155,118 versus 104,943), data compression by 31.9% (543,539 versus 370,158), extended instructions by 30.3% (41,020 versus 28,609), and random string sorting by 29.8% (63,223 versus 44,400). These are exactly the workloads that scale with simultaneous hardware threads, and the Ryzen's 24 threads versus Intel's 20 show up clearly here.

The multi-threaded rendering picture is more interesting than it first appears. Cinebench R23 multi-core favors Intel by 17.4% (31,558 versus 26,876), yet Cinebench R15 multi-core favors AMD by 26.4% (4,320 versus 3,180). The divergence between the two Cinebench generations suggests Intel's advantage grows in longer, heavier sustained runs while AMD's thread count pays off in the older, shorter test. PassMark multithread sides with AMD at 45,010 versus 37,084, a 17.6% margin for the Ryzen.

Floating point math is a rare Intel win on the computational side: 129,817 versus 94,287, a 37.7% advantage for the 265T. PassMark physics is effectively a tie with a slight Intel edge, 2,391 versus 2,346, a 1.9% difference. Data encryption goes to AMD by 9.5% (32,789 versus 29,687), and find prime numbers is a near-dead heat with AMD ahead by just 2.1% (329 versus 322).

Where Each One Wins

The data draws a clean split. The Ryzen 9 7845HX is the choice for throughput-oriented work: integer-heavy computation, data compression, encryption, string sorting, extended instruction workloads, and general multithreaded load all favor it, most by margins near or above 30%. Any pipeline built around parallel integer operations, archiving, or sorting will extract more from the 7845HX.

The Core Ultra 7 265T is the choice wherever per-core speed governs the experience. Its 140.6% Cinebench R23 single-core lead and its sweep of all single-threaded tests make it clearly superior for applications that lean on one fast core at a time. Its floating point win of 37.7% and its Cinebench R23 multi-core win of 17.4% also show it is not a single-thread-only part; it can sustain heavy all-core rendering work in the longer R23 run.

Physics simulation is effectively neutral territory (1.9% apart), so buyers running that workload should weigh other factors in the spec table rather than benchmark deltas.

Against their respective nearest rivals, both chips sit in crowded company. The 265T's average score of 47,697 puts it 0.4% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 5945, 0.4% behind the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X3D, 0.5% behind the AMD Ryzen 9 3900, and 0.5% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H, a tight four-way cluster. The 7845HX's 46,654 average is dead level with the Intel Xeon w3-2535 (0% delta), 0.4% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 3900X, 0.5% behind the Intel Core i7-13700K, and 0.7% behind the AMD Ryzen 9 5900.

Architecture Differences

These are fundamentally different designs aimed at different markets. The Core Ultra 7 265T is a desktop Arrow Lake-S processor built on TSMC's 3 nm node, packing 17,800 million transistors into a single 243 mm² die, on Intel Socket 1851. It fields 20 cores and 20 threads, meaning no SMT-style doubling, with a 1.50 GHz base clock that boosts to 5.30 GHz. Its cache hierarchy emphasizes per-core capacity: 192 KB of L1 per core, a generous 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3.

The Ryzen 9 7845HX is a mobile Dragon Range part on the Zen 4 architecture, built on TSMC's 5 nm process across two 71 mm² dies holding 13,140 million transistors, using AMD Socket FL1. It has 12 cores but 24 threads, a 3.00 GHz base, and a 5.20 GHz boost. Its cache strategy is inverted: smaller per-core allocations of 64 KB L1 and 1 MB L2, but a much larger 64 MB of shared L3, more than double Intel's 30 MB.

Memory and platform support diverge in AMD's favor on expansion. Both support dual-channel DDR5, but Intel delivers 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth versus AMD's 83.2 GB/s. AMD counters with 28 Gen 5 PCIe lanes against Intel's 20, and with ECC memory support, which Intel omits. Intel's integrated graphics are far stronger on paper: Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 EU versus AMD's Radeon 610M.

Power and tunability are the final divides. The 265T is a 35 W part with a locked multiplier. The 7845HX runs at 55 W with an unlocked multiplier, giving it overclocking headroom the Intel chip simply does not offer. Both remain in active production.

The Verdict

For responsive, latency-sensitive, single-thread-dominant use, the Core Ultra 7 265T is the clear pick from this data: it wins every single-threaded benchmark, by margins ranging from 10.2% to 140.6%, while also winning Cinebench R23 multi-core and floating point math. Its 35 W TDP reinforces its position as an efficiency-oriented desktop part.

For parallel throughput, the Ryzen 9 7845HX wins the argument: it leads integer math by 32.3%, compression by 31.9%, string sorting by 29.8%, extended instructions by 30.3%, PassMark multithread by 17.6%, and Cinebench R15 multi-core by 26.4%. Add ECC support, 28 PCIe lanes, and an unlocked multiplier, and the 7845HX is the more flexible foundation for a heavily loaded, expandable system.

The aggregate scores say these two are near-peers, separated by barely a percentile and a low single-digit percentage in average benchmark score. The workload decides. Rendering and snappy per-core performance point to Intel; integer-bound and thread-count-bound throughput points to AMD.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in single-threaded workloads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265T, decisively. It wins PassMark single-thread 4,338 to 3,935 (10.2%), Cinebench R15 single-core 449 to 295 (52.2%), and Cinebench R23 single-core 4,455 to 1,852 (140.6%).

Q: Which CPU is better for multi-threaded workloads?

A: It depends on the test, but the overall edge goes to the Ryzen 9 7845HX. It wins PassMark multithread by 17.6% and Cinebench R15 multi-core by 26.4%, though the 265T takes Cinebench R23 multi-core by 17.4%.

Q: Do both CPUs support DDR5 memory?

A: Yes, both support dual-channel DDR5. The 265T provides 102.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth against 83.2 GB/s for the 7845HX.

Q: Which CPU has more cache?

A: The Ryzen 9 7845HX has far more shared L3 cache at 64 MB versus 30 MB, but the 265T has much larger per-core caches: 192 KB of L1 and 3 MB of L2 per core, against 64 KB and 1 MB per core on the AMD side.

Q: Can either CPU be overclocked?

A: Only the Ryzen 9 7845HX, which has an unlocked multiplier. The Core Ultra 7 265T is multiplier-locked.

Q: How do their overall database ranks compare?

A: They are nearly identical: the 265T sits in the 90th percentile with an average score of 47,697, while the 7845HX sits in the 89th percentile with an average score of 46,654.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Core Ultra 7 265T | AMD Ryzen 9 7845HX |

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

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Architecture | Arrow Lake (Arrow Lake-S) | Zen 4 (Dragon Range) |

| Series | Core Ultra Series 2 | 7000 series |

| Cores / Threads | 20 / 20 | 12 / 24 |

| Base clock | 1.50 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.30 GHz | 5.20 GHz |

| TDP | 35 W | 55 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1851 | AMD Socket FL1 |

| Process node | 3 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 17,800 million | 13,140 million |

| Die size | 243 mm² | 2x 71 mm² |

| L1 cache | 192 KB per core | 64 KB per core |

| L2 cache | 3 MB per core | 1 MB per core |

| L3 cache | 30 MB shared | 64 MB shared |

| Memory bandwidth | 102.4 GB/s | 83.2 GB/s |

| ECC memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 20 lanes | Gen 5, 28 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Arc Xe-LPG, 64 EU | Radeon 610M |

| Multiplier unlocked | No | Yes |

| Release date | 2025-01-06 | 2023-01-03 |

| Launch MSRP | $384 | Not applicable |