AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS vs Intel Core 5 211TE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains a full benchmark suite for the Intel Core 5 211TE, but no corresponding scores for the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS. Direct numerical comparison is therefore impossible. The Intel Core 5 211TE delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12201 and a single-core score of 1722. In Cinebench R20, it records 5124 multi-core and 723 single-core. The older Cinebench R15 run shows 1229 multi-core and 173 single-core.

The PassMark suite for the Intel part shows a multi-thread score of 11685 and a single-thread score of 1408. Integer math reaches 33991, floating-point math reaches 26150, and extended instructions score 8615. Data compression posts 133434, while data encryption posts 7231. Random string sorting scores 14838, physics scores 1278, and finding prime numbers scores 72.

The average benchmark score for the Intel Core 5 211TE is 15370. This places it at the 69th percentile of all CPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals in aggregate score are the AMD Ryzen 3 7440U at 15682 (2% higher), the AMD EPYC 7543 at 15477 (0.7% higher), the AMD EPYC 7702P at 15130 (1.6% lower), and the Intel Core i3-1315U at 15022 (2.3% lower). The Intel part sits within a tight 4.3% band across these four rivals, indicating consistent mid-pack positioning.

Because the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS has no benchmark entries in the database, no head-to-head wins can be assigned. The wins counter shows zero for both processors. The analysis must rely on architectural and specification differences rather than measured performance deltas.

Where Each One Wins

Without recorded benchmarks for the AMD part, use-case conclusions rest on specification differences. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS uses 8 cores and 16 threads on a 4 nm TSMC process, with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The Intel Core 5 211TE uses 10 cores and 16 threads on a 10 nm Intel process, with a base clock of 1.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The AMD part has a substantially higher base clock, 2.10 GHz above the Intel part, which suggests stronger sustained single-thread throughput in workloads that do not scale across many cores.

The Intel part brings two additional physical cores. For workloads that scale linearly with core count, the 10-core layout could provide a scheduling advantage, though the lower base clock may offset that in power-constrained scenarios. Both parts share a 45 W TDP, so the thermal envelope is identical. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP8 and targets the mobile market segment, while the Intel part uses Intel Socket 1700 and targets the desktop segment.

Cache configurations differ. The AMD part uses 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3. The Intel part uses 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 20 MB shared L3. The Intel part holds an advantage in every cache level: 25% more L1 per core, 25% more L2 per core, and 25% more L3 overall. Memory bandwidth favors the AMD part at 89.6 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s for the Intel part, a 16.7% difference.

Integrated graphics differ sharply. The AMD part carries the Radeon 780M, while the Intel part carries UHD Graphics 730. The AMD solution is widely regarded as the stronger iGPU for media and light graphics work, though no benchmark numbers confirm this in the database. The Intel part supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the AMD part supports DDR5 only. Both support ECC memory.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS suits workloads that benefit from high clock speeds and memory bandwidth, particularly single-threaded tasks and memory-heavy operations. Its 5.10 GHz boost clock and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth give it a structural edge in latency-sensitive or bandwidth-bound applications. The mobile socket and 4 nm process also indicate a design focused on efficiency within the 45 W envelope.

The Intel Core 5 211TE suits workloads that scale across many cores and benefit from larger caches. Its 10 cores, 16 threads, 20 MB L3, and more generous per-core cache levels position it for parallel throughput. The desktop socket and DDR4 compatibility broaden its integration options for embedded systems that reuse existing platforms. Its recorded benchmark scores place it at the 69th percentile, with an average score of 15370, and it outperforms the AMD EPYC 7702P by 1.6% and the Intel Core i3-1315U by 2.3% in aggregate.

The absence of AMD benchmark data prevents a definitive performance verdict. The specification comparison indicates the AMD part should win single-thread and memory-bound scenarios, while the Intel part should win multi-core and cache-sensitive scenarios. Both parts carry a 45 W TDP and support ECC memory, so neither offers a power or reliability advantage. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $221, which is recorded in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core 5 211TE has 10 cores, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS has 8 cores. Both have 16 threads.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The AMD part has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The Intel part has a base clock of 1.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz.

Q: Which processor supports more memory types?

A: The Intel Core 5 211TE supports both DDR4 and DDR5. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS supports DDR5 only. Both use dual-channel memory buses and support ECC memory.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth for each?

A: The AMD part has 89.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The Intel part has 76.8 GB/s.

Q: What integrated graphics do they use?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS uses Radeon 780M. The Intel Core 5 211TE uses UHD Graphics 730.

Q: What is the Intel part's average benchmark score and percentile?

A: The Intel Core 5 211TE has an average benchmark score of 15370 and sits at the 69th percentile of all CPUs in the database. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 3 7440U, scores 2% higher at 15682.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS uses the Zen 4 architecture under the Hawk Point codename, part of the 8000 series. It is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC with 25,000 million transistors and a die size of 178 mm². The Intel Core 5 211TE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and is built on a 10 nm process at Intel with a die size of 215 mm². The transistor count for the Intel part is not recorded in the database.

The process node difference is significant. The 4 nm TSMC node versus the 10 nm Intel node represents a major density and efficiency gap, which explains the AMD part's higher clock speeds within the same 45 W TDP. The AMD die is 37 mm² smaller despite holding 8 cores, which reflects the denser process. The Intel die is larger and uses an older node, which typically indicates higher power draw per unit of performance, though both parts are rated at the same TDP.

Cache architectures differ in size and organization. The AMD part allocates 64 KB L1 per core and 1 MB L2 per core, with 16 MB shared L3. The Intel part allocates 80 KB L1 per core and 1.25 MB L2 per core, with 20 MB shared L3. The Intel part leads each cache tier. The AMD part counters with higher memory bandwidth: 89.6 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s.

PCIe support differs. The AMD part provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The Intel part provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. Gen 5 doubles the per-lane bandwidth of Gen 4, so the Intel part's 16 Gen 5 lanes can deliver more total I/O bandwidth despite fewer lanes. The AMD part offers more lanes at the older standard.

The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP8 and is classified as a mobile-market processor. The Intel part uses Intel Socket 1700 and is classified as a desktop-market processor. Both are production-active, neither has an unlocked multiplier, and both were released in 2024 or 2025. The AMD part was released in April 2024, while the Intel part was released in January 2025.

Specification Differences

The core counts differ: 8 cores for the AMD part versus 10 cores for the Intel part. Thread counts match at 16. Base clocks differ by 2.10 GHz in favor of AMD (3.80 GHz versus 1.70 GHz). Boost clocks differ by 0.30 GHz in favor of AMD (5.10 GHz versus 4.80 GHz). TDP is identical at 45 W for both.

Memory support differs: DDR5 only for the AMD part, DDR4 and DDR5 for the Intel part. Memory bandwidth differs by 12.8 GB/s in favor of AMD (89.6 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s). ECC support is present on both. Memory bus width is dual-channel for both.

PCIe differs: Gen 4 with 20 lanes for the AMD part, Gen 5 with 16 lanes for the Intel part. Integrated graphics differ: Radeon 780M for AMD, UHD Graphics 730 for Intel. Sockets differ: AMD Socket FP8 versus Intel Socket 1700. Market segments differ: mobile for AMD, desktop for Intel.

Process nodes differ: 4 nm TSMC for AMD, 10 nm Intel for Intel. Die sizes differ: 178 mm² for AMD, 215 mm² for Intel. Transistor count is recorded only for AMD at 25,000 million. L1 cache differs: 64 KB per core for AMD, 80 KB per core for Intel. L2 cache differs: 1 MB per core for AMD, 1.25 MB per core for Intel. L3 cache differs: 16 MB shared for AMD, 20 MB shared for Intel.

Release dates differ: April 2024 for AMD, January 2025 for Intel. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $221, a part number of SRQDL, and recorded benchmark scores. The AMD part has no launch MSRP, no part number, and no benchmark scores in the database. The Intel part's percentile is 69, while the AMD part's percentile is 50. The Intel part's average benchmark score is 15370, while the AMD part's average is 0 due to missing data.