AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS vs Intel Core 7 253PQE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains benchmark results for the Intel Core 7 253PQE, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS has no benchmark scores listed in the database. This asymmetry means a direct per-test comparison is impossible; the analysis must rely on the Intel part's absolute scores and its standing among rivals.

The Intel Core 7 253PQE delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 31,390 and a single-core score of 4,431. In Cinebench R20, it reaches 13,183 multi-core and 1,861 single-core. The older R15 test shows 3,163 multi-core and 446 single-core. These results indicate a substantial capability in threaded workloads, with the multi-core scores scaling strongly relative to the single-core figures.

PassMark results for the Intel part show a multi-thread score of 41,656, a single-thread score of 4,389, and an average benchmark score of 55,919. The data compression test records 487,335, while data encryption reaches 25,515. Floating point math scores 105,279, integer math scores 137,795, and extended instructions score 32,390. Physics tests show 2,970, prime number finding scores 206, and random string sorting scores 54,222.

Because the AMD part has no recorded benchmarks, the head-to-head wins field shows zero for both processors. The database does not provide comparable numbers for the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS, so any claim of superiority between the two would lack measured support. The Intel Core 7 253PQE's percentile standing of 91 versus all CPUs places it firmly among high-performing desktop processors. Its nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Core i9-14900HX with an average score of 56,004 and a delta of -0.2%, the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 at 56,273 (-0.6%), the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 at 56,306 (-0.7%), and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX at 56,555 (-1.1%).

These delta values, all negative and small, indicate the Intel Core 7 253PQE sits within roughly 1% of those four rivals. The Threadripper PRO 3955WX leads the group by a slim margin, while the Core i9-14900HX is essentially tied with the Core 7 253PQE. This clustering suggests the Intel part performs at a level consistent with established high-end desktop processors, despite lacking a direct AMD Ryzen Embedded comparison in the test suite.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge sharply in their underlying designs. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS uses the Zen 4 architecture under the Hawk Point codename, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core 7 253PQE uses the Bartlett Lake codename, fabricated on Intel's 10 nm process. The AMD part integrates 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, while the Intel database entry omits transistor count and die size.

Core counts differ: the AMD processor has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel processor has 10 cores and 20 threads. Base clocks stand at 3.80 GHz for AMD and 3.50 GHz for Intel, with boost clocks of 5.10 GHz and 5.70 GHz respectively. The Intel part reaches a higher peak frequency, while the AMD part starts from a higher base clock.

Cache hierarchies show distinct configurations. The AMD chip provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The Intel chip provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 33 MB of shared L3. This gives the Intel processor a larger L3 pool and larger per-core L2, which can benefit certain workloads with high data locality.

Memory support differs as well. The AMD processor supports DDR5 exclusively with dual-channel access. The Intel processor supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel. Both list a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s and both support ECC memory. PCIe capabilities separate them: AMD offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while Intel offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The Intel part supports a newer PCIe generation but fewer lanes.

Integrated graphics differ: the AMD part uses Radeon 780M, while the Intel part uses UHD Graphics 770. Market segments also differ, with the AMD product classified as Mobile and the Intel product as Desktop. The AMD processor uses AMD Socket FP8, while the Intel processor uses Intel Socket 1700. TDP ratings show a notable gap: 45 watts for AMD versus 125 watts for Intel. Release dates place the AMD part at April 2024 and the Intel part at March 2026. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $409, while the AMD entry lists none.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 7 253PQE has 10 cores and 20 threads, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS boosts to 5.10 GHz, while the Intel Core 7 253PQE boosts to 5.70 GHz.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core 7 253PQE has 33 MB of shared L3 cache, compared to 16 MB on the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS and the Intel Core 7 253PQE support ECC memory.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS supports DDR5 only, while the Intel Core 7 253PQE supports both DDR4 and DDR5.

Q: What is the Intel processor's standing among all CPUs?

A: The Intel Core 7 253PQE has a percentile rank of 91 against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 55,919.

The Verdict

The available data does not permit a direct performance verdict between the two processors, since the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS has no recorded benchmark scores. The Intel Core 7 253PQE, however, demonstrates strong measured performance: its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 31,390 and single-core score of 4,431 place it in the top percentile of all CPUs. Its average benchmark score of 55,919 sits within 1.1% of four high-end rivals, including the Intel Core i9-14900HX and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX.

From a specification standpoint, the Intel part leads in core count, thread count, boost clock, L3 cache size, and PCIe generation. The AMD part leads in base clock, smaller process node (4 nm versus 10 nm), and lower TDP (45 watts versus 125 watts). The AMD processor also has a smaller die and integrates more transistors per area, reflecting its newer manufacturing process.

For users selecting between these two based strictly on the database, the Intel Core 7 253PQE offers a proven benchmark profile and a 91st percentile ranking. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS offers efficiency-oriented features such as a lower TDP and a smaller process node, but without measured scores, its performance cannot be quantified in this comparison. The Intel part's launch MSRP is $409. The AMD part has no listed price.

The data suggests the Intel processor suits workloads that demand high multi-threaded throughput and single-core speed, based on its Cinebench and PassMark scores. The AMD processor suits scenarios prioritizing lower power consumption and compact mobile integration, based on its classification and TDP. Neither can be declared a performance winner without AMD benchmark data.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two processors:

• Cores: 8 (AMD) versus 10 (Intel)
• Threads: 16 (AMD) versus 20 (Intel)
• Base Clock: 3.80 GHz (AMD) versus 3.50 GHz (Intel)
• Boost Clock: 5.10 GHz (AMD) versus 5.70 GHz (Intel)
• TDP: 45 watts (AMD) versus 125 watts (Intel)
• Socket: AMD Socket FP8 versus Intel Socket 1700
• Architecture: Zen 4 (AMD) versus not listed (Intel)
• Codename: Hawk Point (AMD) versus Bartlett Lake (Intel)
• Process Node: 4 nm (AMD) versus 10 nm (Intel)
• Foundry: TSMC (AMD) versus Intel (Intel)
• Transistors: 25,000 million (AMD) versus not listed (Intel)
• Die Size: 178 mm² (AMD) versus not listed (Intel)
• L1 Cache: 64 KB per core (AMD) versus 80 KB per core (Intel)
• L2 Cache: 1 MB per core (AMD) versus 2 MB per core (Intel)
• L3 Cache: 16 MB shared (AMD) versus 33 MB shared (Intel)
• Memory Support: DDR5 (AMD) versus DDR4, DDR5 (Intel)
• PCIe: Gen 4, 20 lanes (AMD) versus Gen 5, 16 lanes (Intel)
• Integrated Graphics: Radeon 780M (AMD) versus UHD Graphics 770 (Intel)
• Market Segment: Mobile (AMD) versus Desktop (Intel)
• Release Date: 2024-04-01 (AMD) versus 2026-03-08 (Intel)
• Launch MSRP: not listed (AMD) versus $409 (Intel)
• Part Number: unknown (AMD) versus SA4QA (Intel)
• Percentile vs All CPUs: 50 (AMD) versus 91 (Intel)
• Average Benchmark Score: 0 (AMD) versus 55,919 (Intel)

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 253PQE wins on raw performance metrics that have been measured. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 31,390 and single-core score of 4,431 indicate strong capability in both parallel and single-threaded tasks. The PassMark multi-thread score of 41,656 and single-thread score of 4,389 reinforce this pattern. The data compression score of 487,335 and integer math score of 137,795 suggest particular strength in data-heavy and computation-heavy workloads. The extended instructions score of 32,390 shows robust SIMD performance.

The Intel part also wins on specification breadth: 10 cores versus 8, 20 threads versus 16, 5.70 GHz boost versus 5.10 GHz, 33 MB L3 versus 16 MB, and support for both DDR4 and DDR5 memory. Its PCIe Gen 5 interface provides a newer connectivity standard. The 91st percentile ranking places it clearly above the AMD part's 50th percentile, though this difference partially reflects the absence of AMD benchmark data.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS wins on efficiency and integration. Its 45-watt TDP is dramatically lower than the Intel part's 125 watts, making it suitable for thermally constrained environments. The 4 nm process node from TSMC represents a more advanced manufacturing technology than Intel's 10 nm. The AMD part also has a higher base clock (3.80 GHz versus 3.50 GHz), which can help in lightly threaded tasks that do not reach boost frequencies. Its 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes provide more lane count, even if at an older generation.

The AMD processor's mobile classification and smaller die size (178 mm²) suggest design priorities around space and power. The Intel processor's desktop classification and larger core count indicate a focus on maximum throughput. The recorded data shows the Intel part has a proven benchmark profile, while the AMD part's strengths remain qualitative: lower power, newer process, and mobile form factor. For workloads like video encoding, compilation, or scientific computing that scale with cores and cache, the Intel part's 10 cores and 33 MB L3 likely hold an advantage. For embedded systems with strict power budgets or passive cooling, the AMD part's 45-watt TDP and 4 nm efficiency align better with those constraints.