AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX vs Intel Core 5 221TE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep in favor of the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX. Across all 13 head-to-head comparisons, the AMD part wins every single test, with the Intel Core 5 221TE failing to register a single victory. The margins are not subtle; they are among the largest the database records for comparable mobile and desktop processors.

The most lopsided result comes in PassMark's find prime numbers test, where the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX scores 304 versus Intel's 59, a delta of 415.3%. That is more than four times the raw output, indicating a massive advantage in integer-heavy, dependency-chain workloads. Extended instructions follow a similar pattern, with AMD at 36,527 against Intel's 9,655, a 278.3% gap. Data encryption shows a 233.8% delta (29,919 versus 8,963), and random string sorting lands at 242.4% (57,971 versus 16,929). Integer math is another blowout: 146,506 versus 42,303, a 246.3% difference.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX posts 25,265 against Intel's 11,305, a 123.5% advantage. This is the headline productivity metric, and the data indicates the AMD part more than doubles the Intel chip's rendering throughput. Single-core Cinebench R23 is closer but still firmly AMD's: 1,857 versus 1,596, a 16.4% lead. PassMark single-thread scores tell a similar story, with AMD at 3,958 versus Intel's 1,734, a 128.3% delta. That single-thread gap is surprising given the Intel part's 5.00 GHz boost clock, but the architecture differences explain it, as detailed below.

Floating-point math shows AMD at 86,747 versus Intel's 31,661, a 174% delta. PassMark multi-thread (a composite metric) has AMD at 41,732 versus Intel's 13,301, a 213.8% gap. Physics simulation follows at 2,185 versus 977, a 123.6% lead. Data compression is also one-sided: 496,427 versus 156,682, a 216.8% delta. The overall average benchmark score reflects this dominance: the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX averages 71,797 across all tests, while the Intel Core 5 221TE averages just 17,860. The AMD part sits in the 94th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the Intel chip ranks in the 71st percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX uses Zen 4 architecture on TSMC's 5 nm process node, built as part of the Dragon Range codename family. It is a 12-core, 24-thread part with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The Intel Core 5 221TE uses Bartlett Lake on Intel's 10 nm node, offering 10 cores and 16 threads with a base clock of 1.80 GHz and a boost of 5.00 GHz. The core and thread counts alone explain much of the multi-threaded gap, but the cache hierarchy and process node differences compound the effect.

AMD configures the Ryzen 7 8840HX with 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 64 MB L3 cache. Intel's Core 5 221TE has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, but only 24 MB of shared L3. That 64 MB versus 24 MB L3 differential is critical for data-heavy workloads, particularly the PassMark compression and encryption tests where AMD wins by over 200%. The Intel part's larger per-core L1 and L2 do not compensate for the dramatically smaller shared pool.

The process node is another major differentiator. TSMC's 5 nm process, used by AMD, allows for higher transistor density and lower power draw per operation. Intel's 10 nm process is older and less efficient. The transistor count reflects this: the AMD part contains 13,140 million transistors across a dual-die design with a die size of 2x 71 mm². Intel's die is a single 215 mm² piece, but the database does not list a transistor count for it. The smaller, more modern AMD dies enable the higher boost clock and the substantial single-thread advantage.

Memory support also differs. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX supports DDR5 only, with dual-channel memory and a bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. The Intel Core 5 221TE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, but its peak bandwidth is lower at 76.8 GB/s. That 6.4 GB/s difference is modest but consistent with the overall performance gap. ECC memory is supported on the Intel part but not on the AMD chip, a notable feature for certain workstation use cases.

PCIe lane counts differ as well. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX provides Gen 5 support with 28 CPU lanes, while the Intel Core 5 221TE offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes. For users planning to run multiple high-bandwidth devices such as GPUs or NVMe storage, the AMD part has a clear expansion advantage. The integrated graphics differ: AMD uses Radeon 610M, Intel uses UHD Graphics 730. Neither is a gaming-class solution, but they serve different basic display-output roles.

The Intel Core 5 221TE has a launch MSRP of $232, while the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX has no recorded launch MSRP in the database. The Intel chip is a desktop part on Socket 1700, while the AMD chip is a mobile part on AMD Socket FL1. This is a fundamental segmentation difference: the 8840HX is designed for laptops and compact mobile systems, whereas the 221TE is a desktop processor. The AMD part has an unlocked multiplier; the Intel part does not.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core rendering?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX scores 25,265 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Intel Core 5 221TE scores 11,305. That is a 123.5% advantage for AMD, more than doubling the Intel chip's output.

Q: How do the two compare in single-thread performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX leads in Cinebench R23 single-core with 1,857 versus Intel's 1,596, a 16.4% gap. In PassMark single-thread, AMD scores 3,958 versus Intel's 1,734, a 128.3% delta. Despite similar boost clocks (5.10 GHz versus 5.00 GHz), AMD's architecture delivers significantly higher per-thread throughput.

Q: What explains the massive difference in data encryption performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX scores 29,919 in PassMark data encryption, versus Intel's 8,963, a 233.8% delta. The AMD part's 64 MB shared L3 cache and 24 threads provide far more parallel capacity and cache bandwidth for encryption workloads than Intel's 24 MB L3 and 16 threads.

Q: Is the Intel Core 5 221TE ever faster in any recorded benchmark?

A: No. Across all 13 head-to-head tests in the database, the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX wins every one. The Intel part records zero wins.

Q: What are the memory support differences?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX supports DDR5 only, with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 5 221TE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth. Intel also supports ECC memory, while AMD does not.

Q: Which processor has more CPU PCIe lanes?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX has 28 Gen 5 lanes, while the Intel Core 5 221TE has 16 Gen 5 lanes. This gives the AMD part more headroom for multiple high-speed expansion devices.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX outperforms the Intel Core 5 221TE in every single benchmark recorded in the database. The average benchmark score of 71,797 versus 17,860 places the AMD part in the 94th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel chip sits in the 71st percentile. The AMD part's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF (71,910 average score, 0.2% behind) and Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 (71,370, 0.6% behind), confirming it competes in a much higher performance tier. The Intel Core 5 221TE's nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT (17,891, 0.2% behind) and Intel Core 5 120U (17,898, 0.2% behind), placing it in a fundamentally different class.

For anyone choosing between these two based on raw compute performance, the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX is the only rational pick. It delivers 123.5% higher multi-core Cinebench scores, 128.3% higher single-thread PassMark scores, and 213.8% higher multi-thread PassMark scores. The Intel part offers ECC memory support and a lower TDP of 45 watts versus 55 watts, but those are niche advantages that do not offset the massive performance deficit.

The form factor difference matters, however. The AMD part is a mobile processor on Socket FL1, while the Intel part is a desktop processor on Socket 1700. A system builder choosing a desktop platform cannot directly swap these chips; the socket and market segment are incompatible. The Intel part wins only in the specific scenario where a desktop platform requires ECC memory support and a lower power envelope, and where the user does not need multi-core performance beyond what a 10-core, 16-thread part can deliver.

Specification Differences

• Cores: AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX has 12, Intel Core 5 221TE has 10.
• Threads: AMD has 24, Intel has 16.
• Base clock: AMD 2.90 GHz, Intel 1.80 GHz.
• Boost clock: AMD 5.10 GHz, Intel 5.00 GHz.
• TDP: AMD 55 watts, Intel 45 watts.
• Socket: AMD Socket FL1, Intel Socket 1700.
• Process node: AMD 5 nm (TSMC), Intel 10 nm (Intel).
• Codename: Dragon Range versus Bartlett Lake.
• Die size: AMD 2x 71 mm², Intel 215 mm².
• L1 cache: AMD 64 KB per core, Intel 80 KB per core.
• L2 cache: AMD 1 MB per core, Intel 1.25 MB per core.
• L3 cache: AMD 64 MB shared, Intel 24 MB shared.
• Memory support: AMD DDR5 only, Intel DDR4 and DDR5.
• Memory bandwidth: AMD 83.2 GB/s, Intel 76.8 GB/s.
• ECC memory: Not supported on AMD, supported on Intel.
• PCIe lanes: AMD 28 Gen 5 lanes, Intel 16 Gen 5 lanes.
• Integrated graphics: AMD Radeon 610M, Intel UHD Graphics 730.
• Market segment: AMD mobile, Intel desktop.
• Multiplier unlocked: AMD yes, Intel no.
• Transistors: AMD 13,140 million, Intel not listed.
• Part number: AMD 100-000001850, Intel SRVQS.
• Release date: AMD 2025-04-22, Intel 2025-01-12.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX wins everywhere that compute throughput matters. It dominates multi-threaded rendering (Cinebench R23 multi-core by 123.5%), integer math (246.3%), floating-point math (174%), data encryption (233.8%), data compression (216.8%), extended instructions (278.3%), prime number calculation (415.3%), random string sorting (242.4%), physics simulation (123.6%), and multi-thread composite scores (213.8%). It also wins single-thread performance by 16.4% in Cinebench R23 and 128.3% in PassMark. Users running compilation workloads, video encoding, 3D rendering, scientific simulation, or any parallel compute task will see dramatic gains from the AMD part.

The Intel Core 5 221TE wins in exactly one area: platform flexibility on the desktop. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, which allows system builders to reuse older DDR4 modules, and it supports ECC memory, which the AMD part does not. Its lower 45 watt TDP makes it easier to cool in compact desktop chassis, and its Socket 1700 platform offers a broader range of budget motherboards. For a file server or a low-power desktop workstation where ECC memory is a hard requirement and multi-core performance is secondary, the Intel part has a defensible position. But the benchmark data shows no performance scenario where the Intel chip comes out ahead, so its value rests entirely on those platform and memory features, not on compute speed.