AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS vs Intel Core Ultra X7 358H Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data shows two mobile processors aimed at different segments of the embedded and laptop market. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS delivers a high-frequency, 8-core design with a 45 TDP and a 5.10 GHz boost clock, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H counters with a 16-core, 16-thread configuration, a lower 25 TDP, and a 4.80 GHz boost. Based strictly on benchmark results, the Intel part is the stronger performer in the database, holding an 87th percentile ranking among all CPUs compared to AMD's 50th percentile. The Intel chip posts a substantial average benchmark score of 40,967, while the AMD processor's average score is not recorded in the available data.

For users prioritizing multi-threaded throughput, the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H is the clear choice, as its Cinebench scores indicate a decisive advantage. For workloads that favor single-core responsiveness, the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS may hold an edge due to its higher base and boost clocks, but the lack of recorded benchmark scores for the AMD part prevents a direct confirmation from the database. The Intel processor also offers a higher memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s compared to AMD's 89.6 GB/s, which can benefit memory-intensive tasks. The AMD chip supports ECC memory, a feature absent from the Intel part, making it suitable for reliability-focused embedded applications.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between these two processors, but the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H has a full set of recorded scores that establish its performance profile. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel chip scores 18,747 points, which is a strong result for a 25 W part. Its single-core score in the same test is 2,080 points. In Cinebench R20, the Intel processor achieves 12,011 multi-core and 1,695 single-core. The older Cinebench R15 test shows 3,027 multi-core and 301.5 single-core scores.

PassMark results for the Intel part further illustrate its capabilities. The multithread score is 33,802, while the single-thread score is 4,124. Integer math delivers 83,147, and floating point math reaches 103,842. Data compression scores 332,508, and data encryption posts 26,046. Extended instructions achieve 27,274, prime number finding scores 337, and random string sorting reaches 40,357. Physics processing scores 3,021.

These numbers show a processor that excels in parallel workloads. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 18,747 is over nine times higher than the R23 single-core score of 2,080, indicating strong scaling across its 16 cores. The PassMark multithread score of 33,802 is about eight times the single-thread score of 4,124. The data compression score of 332,508 is particularly notable, suggesting efficient handling of large dataset operations.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS has no recorded benchmarks in the database, so its direct performance cannot be quantified here. Its specifications, including 8 cores and 16 threads with a 5.10 GHz boost, suggest competitive single-thread performance, but the data does not support a definitive comparison.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use fundamentally different designs. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS is built on the Zen 4 architecture with the Hawk Point codename, part of the 8000 series. It uses a 4 nm process from TSMC with 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3 with the Panther Lake codename, part of the Ultra X7 generation (Panther Lake-H), and uses a 3 nm process from Intel. The Intel part does not have recorded transistor or die size data in the database.

Core configurations differ significantly. The AMD chip has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel chip has 16 cores and 16 threads, meaning the Intel part does not use simultaneous multithreading. The AMD processor has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, while the Intel processor runs at a base of 1.90 GHz and boosts to 4.80 GHz. The lower base clock on the Intel part likely contributes to its lower 25 W TDP compared to AMD's 45 W TDP.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The AMD processor provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel processor offers 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger per-core L1 and L2 caches on the Intel part may reduce memory latency for certain workloads.

Memory support separates the two as well. The AMD chip supports DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth and includes ECC memory support. The Intel chip supports LPDDR5X on a dual-channel bus with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth but lacks ECC support. The higher memory bandwidth on the Intel part is a significant architectural advantage for memory-bound applications.

PCIe connectivity differs: the AMD processor offers Gen 4 with 20 CPU-only lanes, while the Intel processor provides Gen 5 with 4 CPU-only lanes. Integrated graphics also differ, with AMD using the Radeon 780M and Intel using the Arc B390. The AMD chip uses AMD Socket FP8, while the Intel chip uses Intel BGA 2540. The AMD processor was released on 2024-04-01, while the Intel processor has a release date of 2026-01-04.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H has 16 cores and 16 threads, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel part has double the core count but the same thread count due to no multithreading.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H has a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The AMD part has higher frequencies at both ends.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H supports LPDDR5X memory with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS supports DDR5 with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part offers roughly 71% more memory bandwidth.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H does not support ECC memory. This makes the AMD part more suitable for error-critical embedded applications.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS has a TDP of 45 W. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H has a TDP of 25 W. The Intel part uses 20 W less power, which can benefit thermally constrained designs.

Q: Which processor has a higher benchmark percentile ranking?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H ranks in the 87th percentile among all CPUs in the database. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS ranks in the 50th percentile. The Intel part is positioned significantly higher in the performance distribution.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H wins in multi-threaded and memory-intensive workloads based on recorded data. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 18,747 and PassMark multithread score of 33,802 demonstrate strong parallel processing capability. The 153.6 GB/s memory bandwidth supports data-heavy applications such as video encoding, scientific simulations, and large-scale data processing. The higher L1 cache of 192 KB per core and L2 cache of 3 MB per core may also benefit workloads with high cache locality. The 25 W TDP makes it suitable for fanless or low-power designs where thermal management is critical.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS wins in single-thread frequency and ECC requirements. Its 5.10 GHz boost clock is the highest among the two, potentially delivering faster response in lightly threaded applications such as legacy software or interactive workloads. The 45 W TDP allows for sustained high-frequency operation. The ECC memory support is a differentiator for embedded systems that require data integrity, such as industrial controllers, network appliances, and edge servers. The Radeon 780M integrated graphics may offer competitive GPU performance, though no benchmark data is available to confirm this.

The socket difference also defines use cases. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP8, while the Intel part uses Intel BGA 2540, meaning platform compatibility will dictate which processor can be adopted. The Intel chip's PCIe Gen 5 support with 4 lanes offers high-speed connectivity for specialized devices, while AMD's PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes provides more total lanes for expansion. The AMD processor's larger lane count may be preferable for systems requiring multiple peripherals, while the Intel part's newer PCIe standard may benefit specific high-throughput devices.

The production status for both is active, and the release dates indicate the Intel part is a newer design by nearly two years. The Intel chip's 3 nm process from Intel contrasts with AMD's 4 nm process from TSMC, though the lack of transistor and die size data for the Intel part prevents a scale comparison. The Intel chip's higher core count and memory bandwidth make it the performance leader in the database, while the AMD chip's ECC support and higher clocks define its niche.