AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 vs Intel Core i7-13800H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core i7-13800H and AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 split their 15 recorded head-to-head benchmarks almost evenly, with Intel taking 8 wins and AMD taking 7. But the margins tell a more interesting story than the raw count. Intel’s victories tend to be decisive, while AMD’s are often narrow or concentrated in specific workloads.

The single biggest gap in the entire comparison belongs to Intel in the Cinebench R23 single-core test. The i7-13800H scores 2591 against the Ryzen AI 7 350’s 1958, a 32.3% advantage. That is a massive lead for a single-threaded workload, and it directly reflects the Intel part’s 5.20 GHz boost clock versus 5.00 GHz for the AMD chip. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, Intel again wins, scoring 18358 to 16014.5, a 14.6% margin. That result is notable because the AMD part actually wins the older Cinebench R15 multi-core test by a wide margin: 2477 to 1850, a 25.3% deficit for Intel. The two Cinebench versions clearly reward different architectural traits.

AMD’s strongest wins come in extended instruction workloads and single-threaded PassMark tests. The Ryzen AI 7 350 scores 21678 in PassMark extended instructions, beating Intel’s 18011 by 16.9%. In PassMark single-thread, AMD leads 3834 to 3543, a 7.6% edge. That PassMark single-thread result contrasts sharply with the Cinebench R23 single-core result, where Intel leads by 32.3%. Benchmark methodology matters: Cinebench favors Intel’s high boost, while PassMark’s mixed instruction set appears to suit the Zen 5 core better.

Intel’s other wins include PassMark data encryption (17726 to 15244, up 16.3%), PassMark find prime numbers (115 to 80, up 43.8%), PassMark floating point math (66579 to 53230, up 25.1%), PassMark integer math (92589 to 85651, up 8.1%), PassMark multithread (26545 to 24935, up 6.5%), and PassMark physics (1924 to 1349, up 42.6%). The physics result and the prime number test are both heavily dependent on integer throughput and memory latency, where Intel’s larger L3 cache appears to help.

AMD’s remaining wins are narrow. PassMark data compression goes to AMD by just 1.6% (304089 to 299179). PassMark random string sorting is essentially a tie: AMD scores 33266, Intel 33188, a 0.2% difference. The R15 single-core test goes to AMD by 11.2% (294 to 261), which is a solid margin but on a very old benchmark. Overall, the data shows Intel dominating in raw compute throughput and AMD winning in efficiency-oriented and newer instruction workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-13800H records an average benchmark score of 34988, while the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 records 34222. Both sit at the 84th percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Q: How does the Intel part compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The i7-13800H is statistically tied with the Intel Core i9-12900HX (delta 0%), the Intel Core 7 253PTE (delta 0.1% in Intel’s favor), and the Intel Xeon 6349P (delta 0.3% in Intel’s favor). It trails the Intel Core i5-14500HX by 0.3%.

Q: What about the AMD part’s nearest rivals?

A: The Ryzen AI 7 350 is effectively tied with the AMD EPYC 4244P (delta 0%) and trails the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X by 0.1%. It leads the Intel Core i5-13450HX by 0.3% and the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H by 0.4%.

Q: Which CPU wins more benchmarks overall?

A: The Intel Core i7-13800H wins 8 of the 15 head-to-head tests. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 wins 7. Intel’s wins include all three PassMark math tests, encryption, multithread, physics, and both Cinebench R23 tests.

Q: Is there a single benchmark where the gap is largest?

A: Yes, the largest delta is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where Intel leads by 32.3%. The second largest is PassMark physics, where Intel leads by 42.6%, and PassMark find prime numbers, where Intel leads by 43.8%.

Q: Does the AMD chip win any test by a large margin?

A: The biggest AMD win is Cinebench R15 multi-core, where it beats Intel by 25.3%. Its next largest win is PassMark extended instructions at 16.9%, followed by R15 single-core at 11.2%.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Core i7-13800H uses Raptor Lake architecture (Raptor Lake-H codename) built on Intel’s 10 nm process. It is a hybrid design with 14 cores and 20 threads, implying a mix of performance and efficiency cores. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 uses Zen 5 architecture (Krackan Point codename) built on TSMC’s 4 nm process, with 8 cores and 16 threads. The AMD part is a monolithic design with a mix of Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores, as indicated by its generation label.

Cache configurations differ substantially. Both allocate 80 KB of L1 cache per core, but Intel provides 2 MB of L2 per core versus 1 MB per core for AMD. The L3 cache difference is even more pronounced: Intel has 24 MB shared, AMD has only 8 MB. That 16 MB gap helps explain Intel’s strong showing in integer-heavy and latency-sensitive tests like PassMark physics and prime number finding. AMD’s smaller L3 is partially offset by a higher memory bandwidth figure: 89.6 GB/s for the AMD part, while Intel’s memory bandwidth is not recorded in the database.

The process node difference is significant: Intel uses 10 nm, AMD uses 4 nm. That smaller node contributes to AMD’s lower TDP of 28 watts versus Intel’s 45 watts. Die size also differs: Intel’s die is 257 mm², AMD’s is 195 mm². AMD’s smaller die on a denser process means the Ryzen AI 7 350 packs its 8 cores into less silicon area.

Integrated graphics differ as well. Intel pairs the CPU with Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units. AMD uses the Radeon 860M. PCIe support also diverges: Intel offers Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only), AMD offers Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only). Memory support follows the platform: Intel accepts DDR4 and DDR5, AMD accepts DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both run dual-channel memory and neither supports ECC.

Specification Differences

The most immediate difference is core count. Intel provides 14 cores and 20 threads; AMD provides 8 cores and 16 threads. Clock speeds favor Intel on both ends: base clock 2.50 GHz versus 2.00 GHz, boost clock 5.20 GHz versus 5.00 GHz. Thermal design power heavily favors AMD: 28 watts versus Intel’s 45 watts, a 17-watt gap that matters in thin laptops.

Process node and foundry differ: Intel uses its own 10 nm process, AMD uses TSMC’s 4 nm. Die size is 257 mm² for Intel, 195 mm² for AMD. L2 cache per core is 2 MB on Intel versus 1 MB on AMD. L3 cache is 24 MB shared on Intel versus 8 MB on AMD. Memory bandwidth is recorded only for AMD at 89.6 GB/s. Memory support: Intel runs DDR4 and DDR5, AMD runs DDR5 and LPDDR5X. PCIe: Intel offers Gen 5 with 8 CPU lanes, AMD offers Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes. Sockets differ: Intel BGA 1744 versus AMD Socket FP8.

The AMD part has no launch MSRP recorded in the database; the Intel part has a launch MSRP of $457. Both are mobile-market segments with active production status. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. Release dates differ by exactly two years: Intel on 2023-01-03, AMD on 2025-01-05. Part numbers are SRMJ2 for Intel and 100-000001601 for AMD.

Where Each One Wins

Intel’s win column is built on compute-heavy, multi-threaded, and integer-intensive workloads. The Cinebench R23 multi-core result (18358 versus 16014.5) shows Intel’s 14-core, 20-thread configuration beating AMD’s 8-core, 16-thread part in modern rendering workloads. The PassMark physics test (1924 versus 1349) and find prime numbers test (115 versus 80) both reward Intel’s larger L3 cache and higher boost clock. Data encryption (17726 versus 15244) is another clear Intel win, useful for anyone doing frequent disk encryption or VPN traffic. Floating point math (66579 versus 53230) and integer math (92589 versus 85651) both go to Intel, making it the better choice for scientific calculations, financial modeling, or any number-crunching task. The multithread PassMark score (26545 versus 24935) confirms Intel’s overall throughput advantage.

AMD’s wins cluster in efficiency-first and specialized instruction workloads. The Cinebench R15 results (multi-core 2477 versus 1850, single-core 294 versus 261) suggest AMD’s Zen 5 cores are more efficient per clock in that benchmark, likely due to better instruction-level parallelism. PassMark extended instructions (21678 versus 18011) shows AMD handling AVX and similar workloads better, which matters for media encoding and some AI inference tasks. PassMark single-thread (3834 versus 3543) gives AMD the edge for lightly threaded desktop responsiveness. Data compression (304089 versus 299179) and random string sorting (33266 versus 33188) are near ties, but AMD edges both, suggesting a slight advantage in database and archive workloads.

For gaming, the data is mixed. Intel wins physics (which often correlates with game engine simulation) by 42.6%, but AMD wins single-thread PassMark by 7.6%, which can matter for frame pacing in CPU-bound titles. There is no direct gaming benchmark in the database, so conclusions must be drawn from the math and physics results.

The Verdict

Choose the Intel Core i7-13800H if your priority is raw multi-threaded compute, integer-heavy workloads, or maximum clock speed. The data shows it winning Cinebench R23 multi-core by 14.6%, PassMark multithread by 6.5%, and every math test except extended instructions. Its 43.8% lead in prime number finding and 42.6% lead in physics make it the obvious pick for engineering simulations, scientific computing, or any task that hammers integer pipes. The 32.3% single-core lead in Cinebench R23 also makes it a strong choice for applications that rely on high boost frequency, such as older games or lightly threaded productivity tools. The 45-watt TDP is a trade-off, but if the laptop can cool it, the performance is there.

Choose the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 if you need efficiency, newer instruction support, or faster memory bandwidth. The 28-watt TDP means it can sustain performance in thinner, quieter laptops that would throttle the Intel part. The 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth (which Intel does not record) and the 16.9% lead in extended instructions make it better suited for media encoding, certain AI workloads, and tasks that use modern SIMD instructions. Its PassMark single-thread win (3834 versus 3543) suggests snappy everyday responsiveness, and the near-tie in data compression means it loses little in archive work. The Cinebench R15 multi-core win by 25.3% hints that in some legacy benchmarks, AMD’s Zen 5 architecture is dramatically better per watt.

For a balanced recommendation: if the machine will run long, sustained multi-core loads and you can accept higher power draw, Intel wins. If the machine is a thin-and-light with limited cooling and you value battery life or low noise, AMD wins. Both parts sit at the 84th percentile of all CPUs, so neither is a weak choice; the decision hinges on workload type and chassis thermals. The Intel part’s higher launch MSRP of $457 (AMD has no recorded launch MSRP) does not change the performance picture, but it does imply Intel positioned this chip at a premium tier.