AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX and Intel Core Ultra 9 285 are both top-tier processors, but the data points to a clear split: the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 is the dominant performer in most benchmark categories, while the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX wins specific workloads. With 17 head-to-head tests, Intel secures 13 wins, while AMD takes 4. The Intel chip leads in all Cinebench tests by a consistent 12.7-12.8% margin, including a 48945 vs 42713 score in Cinebench R23 multi-core. However, the AMD chip wins decisively in integer math (18.4% ahead) and data compression (12.6% ahead), making it a better fit for those specific tasks. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 also holds a slight overall edge in average benchmark score (75488 vs 76212 for AMD, a 0.1% difference) and matches AMD's 95th percentile ranking among all CPUs.

The Verdict

The data shows the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 is the better all-around processor for users prioritizing raw compute performance, especially in rendering and physics-based workloads. Its Cinebench scores are uniformly higher: R15 multi-core (4933 vs 4305), R20 multi-core (20556 vs 17939), and R23 multi-core (48945 vs 42713) all favor Intel by 12.7%. The single-core Cinebench results mirror this, with Intel ahead by 12.8% in R15 and 12.7% in both R20 and R23. For anyone running CPU-bound rendering, simulation, or physics engines, the Intel chip is the clear choice.

The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX, however, wins in integer-heavy workloads. Its PassMark integer math score of 195180 is 18.4% higher than Intel's 164869, and it leads in data compression (677755 vs 602121, a 12.6% advantage) and extended instructions (49823 vs 45357, a 9.8% edge). These results suggest AMD's architecture handles certain algorithmic tasks more efficiently. Users whose primary applications rely on compression, encryption, or integer arithmetic may find the AMD chip performs better despite its overall benchmark deficit.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 also wins in multi-threaded PassMark (56602 vs 51405, a 9.2% lead) and dominates floating-point math (194988 vs 117453, a 39.8% advantage). Its physics score of 3598 versus AMD's 2168 represents a 39.7% gap. These are substantial differences, not marginal ones. The Intel chip's 24 cores (versus AMD's 16) and higher boost clock of 5.60 GHz (versus 5.40 GHz) contribute to this performance, though the architecture differences are more significant.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 wins every single-core benchmark. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 6909 versus AMD's 6030 (a 12.7% advantage). The PassMark single-thread test also favors Intel, with a score of 4881 versus 3907 (a 20% gap).

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, it wins 4 of 17 head-to-head tests: data compression (12.6% ahead), extended instructions (9.8% ahead), integer math (18.4% ahead), and random string sorting (7% ahead).

Q: What is the core and thread difference between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has 24 cores and 24 threads. Despite fewer cores, AMD's 32 threads allow it to compete in some multi-threaded workloads, though Intel still wins the multi-core Cinebench tests.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 boosts to 5.60 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX boosts to 5.40 GHz. Both have a base clock of 2.50 GHz.

Q: Are both processors in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both rank in the 95th percentile of all CPUs. Their average benchmark scores are very close: 76212 for AMD and 75488 for Intel, a difference of less than 1%.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 supports 102.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth, while the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX supports 83.2 GB/s. Both use dual-channel DDR5 memory.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX is built on TSMC's 5 nm process with 13,140 million transistors across a dual-die design (2x 71 mm²). It uses the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Dragon Range, and features 64 MB of L3 cache. Each core has 64 KB of L1 cache and 1 MB of L2 cache. This is a mobile-focused design, evidenced by its 55W TDP and AMD Socket FL1.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 uses TSMC's more advanced 3 nm process with 17,800 million transistors on a larger 243 mm² die. Its Arrow Lake architecture, codenamed Arrow Lake-S, is a desktop part with a 65W TDP and Intel Socket 1851. The cache layout differs significantly: Intel provides 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. This is a smaller L3 cache than AMD's 64 MB, but the larger per-core L1 and L2 caches may benefit certain workloads.

The process node difference is crucial. Intel's 3 nm process versus AMD's 5 nm allows for higher transistor density despite the larger die. Intel also includes ECC memory support, which AMD does not. Both support PCIe Gen 5, but AMD offers 28 lanes (CPU only) versus Intel's 20 lanes. The integrated graphics differ as well: AMD uses the Radeon 610M, while Intel uses the Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX | Intel Core Ultra 9 285 |

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

| Cores | 16 | 24 |

| Threads | 32 | 24 |

| Boost Clock | 5.40 GHz | 5.60 GHz |

| TDP | 55W | 65W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FL1 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Arrow Lake |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 3 nm |

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

| Die Size | 2x 71 mm² | 243 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 64 MB | 36 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 83.2 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe Lanes | Gen 5, 28 Lanes | Gen 5, 20 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 610M | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Release Date | 2025-04-22 | 2024-12-31 |

| Launch MSRP | None | $579 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 demonstrates consistent superiority in Cinebench workloads. Across all six Cinebench tests (R15, R20, R23, both single and multi-core), Intel wins by 12.7-12.8%. The largest absolute gap is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where Intel scores 48945 versus AMD's 42713. This consistency suggests a fundamental architectural advantage in this rendering workload, not a test-specific anomaly.

PassMark results show a more varied picture. Intel wins the multi-thread test (56602 vs 51405, a 9.2% lead), but AMD wins integer math by a substantial 18.4% (195180 vs 164869). Data compression also favors AMD decisively: 677755 versus 602121, a 12.6% advantage. Extended instructions go to AMD by 9.8% (49823 vs 45357), and random string sorting to AMD by 7% (78781 vs 73651).

Intel's wins in PassMark are even more lopsided in certain tests. Floating-point math shows Intel at 194988 versus AMD's 117453, a 39.8% gap. Physics testing reveals a nearly identical 39.7% difference (3598 vs 2168). The find prime numbers test shows Intel at 459 versus AMD's 262, a 42.9% advantage. Data encryption also goes to Intel (46949 vs 40836, a 13% lead).

The single-thread PassMark test is notable: Intel scores 4881 versus AMD's 3907, a 20% difference. This is the largest single-core gap in the dataset, suggesting Intel's architecture is significantly more efficient per thread in this particular test.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 wins in rendering and simulation workloads. Its Cinebench dominance (12.7-12.8% across all tests) makes it the obvious choice for 3D rendering, video encoding, and other multi-threaded creative applications. The physics score advantage (39.7%) reinforces this, as physics simulations often rely on the same computational patterns. Floating-point math (39.8% ahead) further supports Intel's strength in scientific computing and numerical analysis. The data encryption win (13%) and find prime numbers advantage (42.9%) indicate strong general-purpose compute capabilities.

The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX wins in specific data-processing tasks. Its integer math performance (18.4% ahead) makes it suitable for workloads like database operations, financial calculations, and certain types of scientific computing. Data compression (12.6% ahead) is a clear win, benefiting applications that handle large archives or transfer data. Extended instructions (9.8% ahead) suggest advantages in SIMD-heavy code. Random string sorting (7% ahead) points to strengths in data organization and text processing.

Both chips are in the 95th percentile of all CPUs, and their average benchmark scores are nearly identical (76212 vs 75488, a 0.1% difference). The choice ultimately depends on workload. For most users, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285's broader benchmark wins and higher peak performance make it the safer recommendation. For users whose applications specifically rely on integer math or compression, the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX offers measurable advantages that could translate to real-world speedups. The Intel chip is also a desktop part with ECC memory support, while AMD is a mobile part with a lower 55W TDP.