AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 8945HS vs Intel Core Ultra 7 366H Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 8945HS and Intel Core Ultra 7 366H represent two distinct approaches to high-performance mobile computing. The data shows a clear split: Intel dominates the raw compute and rendering workloads, while AMD secures decisive victories in specific integer and memory-latency-sensitive tasks. With the Intel part winning 13 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, the overall performance crown belongs to the Core Ultra 7 366H, but the Ryzen 9 PRO 8945HS remains highly competitive in its niche.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking pattern in the benchmark data is Intel’s consistent dominance across the Cinebench suite. In Cinebench R23, the Core Ultra 7 366H scores 28,477 points in multi-core versus 25,165 for the AMD, a margin of 11.6%. The single-core gap is nearly identical, with Intel posting 4,020 against 3,552, also an 11.6% advantage. This consistency extends to older Cinebench versions: R20 multi-core shows Intel ahead 11,960 to 10,569 (11.6%), and R15 multi-core shows 2,870 versus 2,536 (11.6%). The single-core deltas are similarly uniform, ranging from 11.7% in R20 to 11.9% in R15.

The PassMark suite reveals where AMD fights back. The Ryzen 9 PRO 8945HS wins PassMark integer math by a substantial 23.5%, scoring 103,390 versus 83,695. Data compression also favors AMD, with a 12.7% lead (368,884 vs. 327,455). Random string sorting goes to AMD by 12.2% (44,668 vs. 39,814), and extended instructions show a narrow 3% advantage for AMD (27,714 vs. 26,901). These four wins demonstrate AMD’s strength in specific computational patterns, particularly those involving integer arithmetic and data manipulation.

However, Intel’s victories in the PassMark suite are often much larger. The most extreme example is find prime numbers, where Intel scores 326 against AMD’s 91 — a staggering 72.1% advantage. Floating point math also heavily favors Intel, with 103,615 versus 63,490, a 38.7% gap. Physics scores show Intel at 2,880 versus 1,430, a 50.3% lead. Data encryption goes to Intel by 15.6% (25,845 vs. 21,820). Even the overall PassMark multithread score favors Intel, 33,429 to 30,378, a 9.1% margin. Single-thread performance is closer, with Intel leading 4,043 to 3,920, just a 3% difference.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different silicon. AMD uses a monolithic Zen 4 design on TSMC’s 4 nm process, codenamed Hawk Point. Intel counters with the Panther Lake architecture, built on Intel’s own 3 nm process. The transistor counts reflect this divide: AMD packs 25,000 million transistors into a 178 mm² die, while Intel does not disclose transistor or die size data in the available specifications.

Core configurations differ dramatically. The Ryzen 9 PRO 8945HS features 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 366H has 16 cores and 16 threads. This means Intel relies on a mix of performance and efficiency cores without hyper-threading, whereas AMD uses full symmetric multithreading across its 8 Zen 4 cores. The cache hierarchy reflects this: Intel provides 192 KB of L1 per core and 2.5 MB of L2 per core, larger allocations than AMD’s 64 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 per core. Shared L3 cache favors Intel slightly, with 18 MB versus AMD’s 16 MB.

Clock speeds tell a story of brute force versus efficiency. AMD’s base clock is 4.00 GHz with a 5.20 GHz boost, while Intel runs at a 2.00 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost. Despite the lower clocks, Intel achieves higher benchmark scores, suggesting superior IPC or efficiency-core contributions. The thermal design points reinforce this: AMD is rated at 45W TDP, while Intel draws only 25W. Memory bandwidth also favors Intel, with 115.2 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s, though both use dual-channel DDR5. Intel additionally supports LPDDR5X, which AMD does not list.

Platform features diverge significantly. AMD uses Socket FP7 and supports ECC memory, a feature absent on Intel’s BGA 2540 package. PCIe connectivity differs in both generation and lane count: AMD provides Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes, while Intel offers Gen 5 with only 12 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics also differ, with AMD featuring Radeon 780M and Intel using Xe3 Graphics.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H leads in multi-core tests across the board. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 28,477 versus 25,165 for the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 8945HS, an 11.6% advantage. PassMark multithread also favors Intel, 33,429 to 30,378, a 9.1% margin.

Q: Does the AMD processor have any significant strengths?

A: Yes, AMD wins four benchmarks. The largest is PassMark integer math, where it scores 103,390 against Intel’s 83,695, a 23.5% lead. It also wins data compression by 12.7% and random string sorting by 12.2%, plus a narrow 3% edge in extended instructions.

Q: How do the core counts compare?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 8945HS has 8 cores and 16 threads. Despite having half the physical cores, AMD matches threads through simultaneous multithreading.

Q: Which processor has better single-thread performance?

A: Intel leads all single-thread benchmarks, but the margin is smaller than in multi-core. In PassMark single-thread, Intel scores 4,043 versus 3,920, a 3% difference. Cinebench R23 single-core shows Intel at 4,020 against 3,552, an 11.6% gap.

Q: What is the most dramatic performance difference between the two?

A: The largest delta is in PassMark find prime numbers, where Intel scores 326 versus AMD’s 91, a 72.1% advantage. This is followed by physics (50.3% Intel lead) and floating point math (38.7% Intel lead).

Q: How do the overall average scores compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 8945HS has an average benchmark score of 41,963, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H averages 41,263. This puts AMD at the 88th percentile of all CPUs and Intel at the 87th, a near-tie in overall standing.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 8945HS | Intel Core Ultra 7 366H |

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

| Cores | 8 | 16 |

| Threads | 16 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 4.00 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.20 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 25 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP7 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Panther Lake |

| Process Node | 4 nm (TSMC) | 3 nm (Intel) |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 25,000 million | Not disclosed |

| Die Size | 178 mm² | Not disclosed |

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

| L2 Cache | 1 MB per core | 2.5 MB per core |

| L3 Cache | 16 MB shared | 18 MB shared |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 115.2 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes | Gen 5, 12 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 780M | Intel Xe3 Graphics |

| Release Date | 2024-04-15 | 2026-01-04 |

| Part Number | 100-000001314 (FP7r2), 100-000001386 (FP7) | SA4R9Q9EL |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H is the clear choice for rendering, scientific computing, and general productivity. Its dominance in all Cinebench versions — R15, R20, and R23, both single and multi-core — makes it the superior option for 3D modeling, video encoding, and CPU-based rendering tasks. The physics benchmark win (2,880 vs. 1,430) suggests strong performance in simulation workloads, while the floating point math lead (103,615 vs. 63,490) indicates an advantage in engineering and analytical applications. Data encryption (25,845 vs. 21,820) also favors Intel for security-related tasks. The find prime numbers result (326 vs. 91) points to exceptional integer throughput in specialized algorithms, though this is an outlier versus AMD’s broader integer math win.

The AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 8945HS is not without its use cases. Its 23.5% lead in PassMark integer math makes it preferable for general-purpose computing, database operations, and code compilation where integer arithmetic dominates. The data compression win (368,884 vs. 327,455) positions it well for file archiving, backup software, and compression-heavy workflows. Random string sorting (44,668 vs. 39,814) suggests an edge in sorting algorithms and text processing. The 3% advantage in extended instructions provides a slight edge in SIMD-heavy workloads that utilize advanced instruction sets.

For users prioritizing raw multi-threaded performance, the Intel part wins 13 of 17 benchmarks including all Cinebench tests. For those with workloads specifically tuned to AMD’s integer strengths, the Ryzen 9 PRO 8945HS offers meaningful gains. The Intel processor also delivers its performance at a lower TDP (25W vs. 45W), making it more efficient per watt in sustained workloads, while AMD counters with ECC memory support and a longer market presence, having launched in April 2024 versus Intel’s January 2026 release.