AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS vs Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data separates these two processors into completely different performance classes. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus dominates every measured workload in the database, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS has no benchmark entries at all, meaning no recorded wins for the AMD side. The Intel part holds a 96th percentile position among all CPUs tracked in the database, while the AMD processor sits at the 50th percentile. That gap alone signals a wide performance chasm.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus shows its greatest strength in multi-threaded workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44,253 points places it far above typical desktop processors. The PassMark multi-thread score of 68,574 reinforces this pattern, as does the PassMark integer math score of 175,986 and floating point math score of 229,491. These numbers indicate sustained heavy lifting across parallel workloads, which aligns with its 24-core, 24-thread configuration.

Single-threaded performance is also strong on the Intel side. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,439 and PassMark single-thread score of 5,068 show that the boost clock of 5.50 GHz translates into real per-core capability. The PassMark physics score of 4,064 and data compression score of 804,322 further confirm that both lightly threaded and heavily threaded tasks favor the Intel part.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS, by contrast, has zero recorded benchmark results in the database. Its 50th percentile ranking suggests it sits in the middle of the CPU population, but without direct measurements, the analysis must rely on its architectural specifications rather than test scores. The 8-core, 16-thread configuration with a 5.10 GHz boost clock places it in the upper mid-range of mobile processors, but the data does not include any performance verification.

The use-case split is therefore stark. For any workload that appears in the database, the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus wins outright. The AMD part cannot claim a single measured victory because no measurements exist for it. The database treats the Intel part as a high-end desktop processor with a 96th percentile rank, while the AMD part remains an unverified mobile chip with a median rank.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear choice for anyone selecting between these two processors. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus delivers top-tier performance across every benchmark category recorded in the database. Its average benchmark score of 93,785 places it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, and its nearest rivals, including the Intel Xeon 6520P at 93,786 and the AMD EPYC 4564P at 95,183, show that it trades blows with enterprise-class server processors. The AMD EPYC 9175F scores 95,615, which is only 1.9% higher than the Intel part, and the AMD EPYC 4565P scores 95,764, just 2.1% higher. This positions the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus within striking distance of EPYC server chips while being a desktop product.

For users prioritizing raw performance, the Intel part is the only option with recorded data. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS offers no benchmark scores, so no performance claims can be made from the database. Its 50th percentile rank suggests it is average, but that is an inference from its position, not a measured result.

The Intel part also offers an unlocked multiplier, enabling overclocking, while the AMD part is locked. The Intel processor targets the desktop segment with a 125 W TDP, while the AMD chip targets mobile with a 45 W TDP. These are fundamentally different market positions. The Intel part is a desktop performance processor, and the AMD part is a mobile embedded processor. The database contains no scenario where the AMD chip wins, so the verdict is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is the superior performer according to all recorded measurements.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark table in the database is empty, so no direct side-by-side scores exist. However, the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has a full set of measurements, and the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS has none. The largest wins for the Intel part can be inferred from its absolute scores.

The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44,253 points is the standout result. This is a heavy multi-threaded workload, and the score reflects the 24-core, 24-thread design. The Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 24,461 and Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 6,656 follow the same pattern, showing consistent scaling across Cinebench versions.

The PassMark data compression score of 804,322 is another major result. This workload benefits from high memory bandwidth, and the Intel part records a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s with dual-channel DDR5 support. The PassMark integer math score of 175,986 and floating point math score of 229,491 show strong arithmetic throughput, which aligns with the 24 cores operating at a 3.70 GHz base clock and 5.50 GHz boost clock.

Single-threaded results are equally decisive. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,439, Cinebench R20 single-core score of 3,453, and Cinebench R15 single-core score of 354 all indicate high per-core performance. The PassMark single-thread score of 5,068 confirms that the boost clock delivers competitive single-thread speeds.

The AMD part has no scores to compare against these figures. The database records no Cinebench, no PassMark, and no other benchmark results for the Ryzen Embedded 8845HS. The only quantitative information available is its specifications, which include 8 cores, 16 threads, a 3.80 GHz base clock, and a 5.10 GHz boost clock. These specifications suggest a capable mobile processor, but the database cannot verify its performance.

The Intel part's nearest rivals provide additional context. The Intel Xeon 6520P matches its average score of 93,786 versus 93,785, a delta of 0%. The AMD EPYC 4564P is 1.5% higher at 95,183, the AMD EPYC 9175F is 1.9% higher at 95,615, and the AMD EPYC 4565P is 2.1% higher at 95,764. These deltas show that the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus performs at the level of server processors, which is remarkable for a desktop chip with a launch MSRP of $299.

FAQ

Q: What is the single biggest performance difference between these two processors?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44,253, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. The Intel part also holds a 96th percentile rank versus the AMD part's 50th percentile.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS has 8 cores and 16 threads.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has an average benchmark score of 93,785. The Intel Xeon 6520P scores 93,786 with a 0% delta, the AMD EPYC 4564P scores 95,183 with a -1.5% delta, the AMD EPYC 9175F scores 95,615 with a -1.9% delta, and the AMD EPYC 4565P scores 95,764 with a -2.1% delta.

Q: What are the clock speeds for each processor?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Both processors support ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS both list ECC memory support as true.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth for each processor?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s with dual-channel DDR5 support. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS has a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s with dual-channel DDR5 support.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS uses 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 on a 178 mm² die. The cache layout includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The integrated graphics are Radeon 780M, and the processor uses AMD Socket FP8. The production status is active, and the release date is 2024-04-01.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus uses the Arrow Lake Refresh codename under the Core Ultra Series 2, specifically the Ultra 7 generation. It is built on a 3 nm process at TSMC, with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The cache layout includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The integrated graphics are Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU, and the processor uses Intel Socket 1851. The production status is active, and the release date is 2026-03-10.

The core counts differ substantially. The Intel part has 24 cores and 24 threads, indicating a performance hybrid configuration without hyper-threading. The AMD part has 8 cores and 16 threads, indicating simultaneous multithreading on all cores. The Intel part has a larger L1 and L2 per core, while the AMD part has a smaller per-core cache but a more compact die.

The process node also differs. The Intel part uses a 3 nm process, while the AMD part uses a 4 nm process. Despite the smaller process, the Intel die is larger at 243 mm² versus 178 mm², and the transistor count is lower at 17,800 million versus 25,000 million. This suggests different design priorities: the Intel part focuses on higher core counts and larger caches, while the AMD part packs more transistors into a smaller area.

The PCIe support differs as well. The Intel part uses Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the AMD part uses Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). This gives the Intel part a newer PCIe interface for high-bandwidth peripherals.

Specification Differences

The specification table reveals several key differences between the two processors.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has a launch MSRP of $299, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS has no recorded launch MSRP. The Intel part has an unlocked multiplier, while the AMD part is locked. The Intel part has a part number of SA4V6, while the AMD part has an unknown part number.

The market segments differ: the Intel part is a desktop processor, while the AMD part is a mobile processor. The TDP reflects this: the Intel part has a 125 W TDP, while the AMD part has a 45 W TDP.

The sockets are different: Intel Socket 1851 for the Intel part, AMD Socket FP8 for the AMD part. The memory support is identical in type (DDR5, dual-channel), but the memory bandwidth differs: 115.2 GB/s for the Intel part versus 89.6 GB/s for the AMD part.

The base clocks are close: 3.70 GHz for the Intel part versus 3.80 GHz for the AMD part. The boost clocks differ more: 5.50 GHz for the Intel part versus 5.10 GHz for the AMD part.

The cache configurations differ across all levels. The Intel part has 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB shared L3. The AMD part has 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3.

The process nodes differ: 3 nm for the Intel part versus 4 nm for the AMD part. Both use TSMC as the foundry. The transistor counts differ: 17,800 million for the Intel part versus 25,000 million for the AMD part. The die sizes differ: 243 mm² for the Intel part versus 178 mm² for the AMD part.

The integrated graphics differ: Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU for the Intel part versus Radeon 780M for the AMD part. Both support ECC memory. The PCIe generations differ: Gen 5 for the Intel part versus Gen 4 for the AMD part, both with 20 lanes.

The release dates differ: 2026-03-10 for the Intel part versus 2024-04-01 for the AMD part. The Intel part belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, while the AMD part belongs to the 8000 series. The Intel part uses the Arrow Lake Refresh codename, while the AMD part uses Hawk Point. The Intel part has no recorded architecture field, while the AMD part uses Zen 4.