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

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 and Intel Core i7-13800H represent two very different philosophies for mobile computing, and the benchmark data in the database reflects that divide. The Intel part leans on a higher core count and higher power envelope to dominate heavily threaded tasks, while the AMD chip counters with superior efficiency in specific workloads and a decisive lead in single-threaded throughput. The recorded metrics show an 11 to 4 win split in favor of the Intel Core i7-13800H across the head-to-head tests, but the nature of those wins and losses tells a more nuanced story than the raw tally suggests.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most significant victory for the Intel Core i7-13800H comes in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it scores 18358 against the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350’s 14278.5, a 22.2% advantage. This is the classic result of a 14-core, 20-thread Raptor Lake-H part versus an 8-core, 16-thread Zen 5 chip. The older Cinebench R15 multi-core test flips the script, however, with the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 taking a 26.3% lead with a score of 2336.5 compared to 1850. This discrepancy suggests that the AMD part scales differently across workload generations, but the Intel chip’s physical core count makes it the more consistent heavy lifter in modern multi-threaded render workloads.

Single-core performance is a mixed bag. The Intel Core i7-13800H wins Cinebench R23 single-core decisively, scoring 2591 against 1954, a 24.6% margin. It also edges out the AMD chip in Cinebench R15 single-core, 261 versus 247, a 5.4% difference. Yet the PassMark single-thread test shows the opposite trend: the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 scores 3872 against the Intel’s 3543, a 9.3% advantage. This indicates that the AMD Zen 5 architecture has a real strength in specific integer-heavy single-threaded operations, even if the Intel chip’s higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz gives it an edge in the Cinebench rendering suite.

In the PassMark suite, the Intel Core i7-13800H dominates the math-heavy tests. It leads in floating point math by 22.4%, scoring 66579 against 51639. Integer math sees a smaller but still clear 8.3% win for Intel, 92589 versus 84868. The physics test is a blowout, with Intel scoring 1924 against AMD’s 1318, a 31.5% margin, the largest single delta in the entire comparison. Prime number finding also favors Intel, 115 versus 81, a 29.6% gap. These are workloads that reward raw core count and sustained power delivery, and the Intel chip’s 45W TDP gives it the headroom to flex.

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350’s wins beyond single-thread PassMark are concentrated in specialized instruction handling. It beats the Intel part in extended instructions by 10.8%, scoring 19955 versus 18011. This measures the efficiency of AVX and related instruction set execution, where Zen 5’s newer microarchitecture shows its pedigree. The rest of the PassMark tests, including data compression, data encryption, multithreaded performance, and random string sorting, all go to Intel by margins ranging from 5.8% to 18.4%. The Intel chip’s data encryption score of 17726 versus 14462 represents an 18.4% lead, a notable result for any security or VPN application.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-13800H is the clear choice for sustained multi-core rendering and heavy computational workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 18358 is 22.2% ahead of the AMD part, and it maintains that advantage across floating point math, integer math, and physics simulations. Data compression and encryption tasks also favor Intel, with 5.8% and 18.4% margins respectively. For users running video encodes, 3D renders, scientific simulations, or any workload that can saturate 20 threads, the Intel chip is the stronger engine. The multithread PassMark score of 26545 versus 23994, a 9.6% lead, confirms this trend across mixed parallel workloads.

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 wins in specific scenarios that reward its newer architecture. The PassMark single-thread score of 3872 is 9.3% higher than Intel’s 3543, which translates to snappier response in lightly threaded applications like office productivity, web browsing, and general desktop use. The 10.8% lead in extended instructions (19955 versus 18011) is particularly relevant for code that leverages modern SIMD instruction sets, such as certain audio processing, scientific computing libraries, and encryption algorithms. The Cinebench R15 multi-core win of 26.3% is an outlier, but it does suggest that the AMD part can outperform the Intel chip in certain older or differently optimized render workloads.

For gamers and everyday users, the single-thread advantage of the AMD part is worth noting. Many game engines still rely heavily on a few fast cores, and the 9.3% PassMark single-thread lead could translate to better frame pacing in CPU-bound titles. However, the Intel chip’s 5.20 GHz boost clock and 24 MB of L3 cache still make it highly capable in this arena. The database shows no clear winner for gaming, but the AMD chip’s efficiency, with a 28W TDP versus Intel’s 45W, means it can maintain its performance for longer in thermally constrained thin-and-light chassis.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core performance in modern workloads?

A: The Intel Core i7-13800H leads in Cinebench R23 multi-core with a score of 18358 versus 14278.5 for the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350, a 22.2% advantage. It also wins PassMark multithread, 26545 versus 23994, a 9.6% margin.

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 faster in single-threaded tasks?

A: The PassMark single-thread test shows the AMD chip winning with 3872 against Intel’s 3543, a 9.3% lead. However, the Intel Core i7-13800H wins Cinebench R23 single-core, 2591 versus 1954, a 24.6% margin, so the answer depends on the specific benchmark.

Q: How do the two chips compare in the Cinebench R15 multi-core test?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 scores 2336.5 against the Intel Core i7-13800H’s 1850, giving AMD a 26.3% win in this older render benchmark.

Q: Which processor has a higher PassMark physics score?

A: The Intel Core i7-13800H scores 1924 in the PassMark physics test, compared to 1318 for the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350, a 31.5% advantage for Intel.

Q: What is the difference in data encryption performance?

A: The Intel Core i7-13800H scores 17726 in PassMark data encryption, while the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 scores 14462, giving Intel an 18.4% lead.

Q: Which chip has a better overall average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 has an average benchmark score of 35719, placing it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core i7-13800H has an average of 34988, in the 84th percentile.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts are the most striking difference. The Intel Core i7-13800H has 14 cores and 20 threads, while the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 has 8 cores and 16 threads. Clock speeds also differ, with the Intel chip running a 2.50 GHz base and 5.20 GHz boost, versus the AMD part’s 2.00 GHz base and 5.00 GHz boost. The thermal design power is a major separator: Intel is rated at 45W, AMD at 28W. The Intel chip supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the AMD chip supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Memory bandwidth is listed for the AMD part at 89.6 GB/s, with no figure recorded for Intel. PCIe support differs as well: Intel offers Gen 5 with 8 CPU lanes, while AMD offers Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes. The Intel chip has ECC memory support disabled, while AMD lists it as supported. The integrated graphics are Radeon 860M for AMD and Iris Xe Graphics 96EU for Intel.

Architecture Differences

The manufacturing processes are from different foundries and nodes. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 is built on a 4 nm process by TSMC, while the Intel Core i7-13800H uses a 10 nm process at Intel. The die sizes reflect this, with AMD at 195 mm² and Intel at 257 mm². The AMD chip uses the Zen 5 architecture with the Krackan Point codename, part of the Ryzen AI PRO 300 generation that mixes Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. Intel uses Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-H codename. Cache hierarchies differ significantly: the AMD part has 1 MB of L2 per core and 8 MB of L3 cache, while Intel has 2 MB of L2 per core and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel chip was released in early 2023, while the AMD chip came in early 2025. The Intel chip has a launch MSRP of $457; the AMD chip has no recorded launch MSRP. The Intel part uses the BGA 1744 socket, AMD uses the FP8 socket.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split based on workload. The Intel Core i7-13800H is the superior choice for heavy multi-threaded workloads. Its 22.2% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 31.5% lead in PassMark physics, and 18.4% lead in data encryption make it the stronger engine for video editing, 3D rendering, scientific computing, and other parallel-heavy tasks. The 14-core, 20-thread configuration, combined with a 45W TDP, allows it to sustain high throughput where power draw is not the primary concern. The 24 MB of L3 cache also gives it a substantial advantage in data-heavy applications. This is the chip for a mobile workstation replacement that prioritizes raw compute over battery life.

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 is the better pick for efficiency and specific modern workloads. Its 28W TDP is significantly lower than Intel’s 45W, which means it can deliver its performance in thinner, lighter laptops with better sustained thermals. The 9.3% PassMark single-thread lead and 10.8% extended instructions advantage make it particularly strong for everyday responsiveness, software development, and applications that use modern SIMD instruction sets. The Cinebench R15 multi-core win of 26.3% is a data point that suggests the AMD part can outperform Intel in certain legacy or differently optimized render paths. For a business ultrabook or a creator laptop that runs on battery, the AMD chip’s 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth and 16 PCIe Gen 4 lanes provide a solid platform. The database’s average benchmark scores place the AMD part marginally ahead, 35719 versus 34988, and its 85th percentile ranking versus Intel’s 84th indicates that the Zen 5 architecture delivers competitive overall performance at a fraction of the power draw. Choose Intel for raw multi-core muscle, choose AMD for efficiency and modern single-threaded responsiveness.