AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS vs Intel Core 7 253PE Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data splits cleanly between these two processors. The Intel Core 7 253PE wins 12 of the 15 head-to-head comparisons, while the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS takes 3. That is not a close overall margin, but the AMD victories cluster in specific workloads where its architecture holds a genuine edge.

The Intel part dominates rendering and compute-heavy multithreaded tasks. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Intel Core 7 253PE scores 24880 against 14784 for the AMD, a 68.3% advantage. That is the largest multicore gap in the entire comparison. Cinebench R15 multicore is closer: 2507 versus 2458, a 2% lead. The R23 result shows that as the workload scales, the Intel part pulls further ahead. PassMark multithread also favors Intel, 29271 versus 26646, a 9.9% win. The Intel part also leads PassMark integer math by 22.3% (114158 versus 93342) and floating-point math by 45.1% (80870 versus 55739). Physics simulation, a heavily threaded workload, goes to Intel by 36.6% (1845 versus 1351). Prime number finding, a test sensitive to both integer throughput and memory latency, shows Intel ahead by 64.3% (138 versus 84).

Single-core performance is also firmly in Intel's corner. Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 103.7% lead (3512 versus 1724), and Cinebench R15 single-core shows a 30.4% lead (354 versus 271.5). PassMark single-thread is closer but still Intel: 3955 versus 3692, a 7.1% edge. Data compression goes to Intel by 9% (339133 versus 311199).

The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS wins exactly three tests, all in PassMark. Data encryption favors AMD by 2.4% (18838 versus 18385). Extended instructions favor AMD by 2.2% (22298 versus 21806). Random string sorting is the largest AMD win: 37922 versus 32777, a 13.6% margin. These are narrow victories in specialized workloads. They do not offset the multicore and single-core gaps, but they indicate that AMD's Zen 4 core design handles certain instruction patterns and memory-access sequences more efficiently.

The verdict from the win distribution: Intel is the choice for rendering, physics, integer and floating-point math, compression, and any workload that scales with core count. AMD is the choice for encryption, extended instruction sets, and random string sorting, though the margins are small enough that most users would not notice the difference outside targeted applications.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion for each buyer profile.

For rendering and heavy multithreaded production work, the Intel Core 7 253PE is the stronger pick. The 68.3% lead in Cinebench R23 multicore is decisive. The 45.1% advantage in floating-point math and 22.3% in integer math reinforce that conclusion. Physics simulation, which often tracks real-world game and engineering workloads, favors Intel by 36.6%. If the task is CPU-bound rendering, compiling, or simulation, the Intel part delivers materially more throughput.

For single-thread responsiveness, Intel also leads, though the margin varies by test. The 103.7% Cinebench R23 single-core gap is unusually large and likely reflects both clock advantage and architectural efficiency in that specific benchmark. PassMark single-thread, a broader measure, shows a more modest 7.1% lead. The Intel part boosts to 5.50 GHz against 5.10 GHz for AMD, and that higher ceiling shows up most clearly in Cinebench.

For mobile and power-sensitive deployments, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS has a structural advantage that the benchmark scores do not capture directly. Its TDP is 28 watts against 65 watts for Intel. The AMD part is a mobile processor on AMD Socket FP7, while the Intel part is a desktop processor on Intel Socket 1700. In a system where thermal envelope and battery life matter, the AMD part is the only one of the two that fits a thin-and-light chassis. The Intel part is not a mobile chip.

For users who need the three AMD-favored workloads, encryption, extended instructions, and random string sorting, the AMD part wins by 2.4%, 2.2%, and 13.6% respectively. Those are narrow edges, and the random string sorting result is the only one that approaches meaningful. No buyer should choose AMD solely for those tests, but a workload dominated by string sorting would see a measurable benefit.

The overall average benchmark score favors Intel: 40557 for the Core 7 253PE versus 39603 for the Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS, a 2.4% difference. Both processors sit at the 87th percentile among all CPUs in the database. The Intel part's nearest rivals include the Intel Core 5 223PE at 40585 (0.1% higher), the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H at 40518 (0.1% lower), and the Intel Xeon 6357P at 40630 (0.2% higher). The AMD part's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450 at 39485 (0.3% lower) and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS at 39325 (0.7% lower). Both chips sit in a dense performance band where small percentage differences separate many products.

The recommendation: choose Intel for maximum compute throughput in desktop systems where power is not a constraint. Choose AMD for mobile platforms, reduced power draw, and the three specialized workloads where it leads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest Intel win is Cinebench R23 single-core: 3512 versus 1724, a 103.7% margin. This is more than double the AMD score and the single biggest percentage gap in the comparison. The Intel part's 5.50 GHz boost clock and 10-core, 20-thread configuration with 33 MB shared L3 cache combine to produce an exceptionally strong single-core result in this test.

Cinebench R23 multicore shows a 68.3% Intel lead (24880 versus 14784). The Intel part has 10 cores and 20 threads against 8 cores and 16 threads for AMD. The core count difference alone does not explain the full gap; the Intel part also sustains higher clocks and carries a larger 33 MB L3 cache versus 16 MB for AMD.

PassMark floating-point math goes to Intel by 45.1% (80870 versus 55739). This workload stresses the FPU and memory pipeline, and the Intel part's higher core count and larger cache pay off. PassMark physics shows a 36.6% Intel lead (1845 versus 1351). PassMark find prime numbers shows a 64.3% Intel lead (138 versus 84), a test that rewards both integer throughput and cache efficiency.

PassMark integer math favors Intel by 22.3% (114158 versus 93342). PassMark data compression favors Intel by 9% (339133 versus 311199). PassMark multithread favors Intel by 9.9% (29271 versus 26646). Cinebench R15 multicore is the tightest Intel win at just 2% (2507 versus 2458), showing that at lower thread counts and shorter runtimes, the two chips are nearly equal.

PassMark single-thread favors Intel by 7.1% (3955 versus 3692). This is a broad single-core measure and a more realistic estimate of everyday responsiveness than the Cinebench single-core results.

The AMD wins are all in PassMark. Random string sorting is the largest: 37922 versus 32777, a 13.6% margin. This test involves heavy memory allocation and pointer chasing, and AMD's Zen 4 memory subsystem handles it more efficiently. Data encryption favors AMD by 2.4% (18838 versus 18385). Extended instructions favor AMD by 2.2% (22298 versus 21806). These two are close enough to be within measurement noise, but the direction is consistent: AMD's core design is slightly better at these specific instruction patterns.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core 7 253PE wins every single-core benchmark in the comparison. Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 103.7% lead (3512 versus 1724), Cinebench R15 single-core shows a 30.4% lead (354 versus 271.5), and PassMark single-thread shows a 7.1% lead (3955 versus 3692).

Q: Which processor is better for multicore rendering?

A: The Intel Core 7 253PE leads in all multicore tests. Cinebench R23 multicore shows a 68.3% advantage (24880 versus 14784), Cinebench R15 multicore shows a 2% advantage (2507 versus 2458), and PassMark multithread shows a 9.9% advantage (29271 versus 26646).

Q: Are there any workloads where the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS wins?

A: Yes, three PassMark tests. Random string sorting favors AMD by 13.6% (37922 versus 32777), data encryption favors AMD by 2.4% (18838 versus 18385), and extended instructions favor AMD by 2.2% (22298 versus 21806).

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The Intel Core 7 253PE has 10 cores and 20 threads. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel part also has a larger L3 cache: 33 MB shared versus 16 MB shared.

Q: What are the power requirements for each processor?

A: The Intel Core 7 253PE has a TDP of 65 watts. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS has a TDP of 28 watts. The AMD part is a mobile processor on AMD Socket FP7, while the Intel part is a desktop processor on Intel Socket 1700.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both support ECC memory. Both also support dual-channel memory with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, but the Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5 while the AMD part supports DDR5 only.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies. The Intel Core 7 253PE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and is built on Intel's 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS uses the Hawk Point codename with Zen 4 architecture, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The AMD part has 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die; the Intel part does not have transistor or die size figures recorded.

The Intel part is a desktop processor on Intel Socket 1700, while the AMD part is a mobile processor on AMD Socket FP7. This is a fundamental platform difference. The Intel part targets desktop builds with higher power delivery, while the AMD part targets laptops and compact mobile systems.

Core configuration differs significantly. Intel provides 10 cores and 20 threads with 80 KB L1 per core and 2 MB L2 per core. AMD provides 8 cores and 16 threads with 64 KB L1 per core and 1 MB L2 per core. The shared L3 cache favors Intel heavily: 33 MB versus 16 MB. The Intel part also boosts higher, to 5.50 GHz against 5.10 GHz, while the AMD part has a higher base clock at 3.30 GHz versus 2.50 GHz.

Memory support differs. The Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5, the AMD part supports DDR5 only. Both use dual-channel memory with identical 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. PCIe support differs: Intel provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), AMD provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The AMD part offers more total lanes but on an older standard.

Integrated graphics differ. The Intel part uses UHD Graphics 730, while the AMD part uses Radeon 780M. The database does not record benchmark scores for these iGPUs, so no performance comparison is possible from the data.

ECC memory support is present on both. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $384; the AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two processors differ in the recorded data.

| Specification | Intel Core 7 253PE | AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 10 | 8 |

| Threads | 20 | 16 |

| Base clock | 2.50 GHz | 3.30 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.50 GHz | 5.10 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 28 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | AMD Socket FP7 |

| Architecture | Not recorded | Zen 4 |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Hawk Point |

| Process node | 10 nm | 4 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 25,000 million |

| Die size | Not recorded | 178 mm² |

| L1 cache | 80 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 cache | 2 MB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 33 MB (shared) | 16 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Radeon 780M |

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release date | 2026-03-08 | 2024-04-15 |

| Launch MSRP | $384 | Not recorded |

| Part number | SA4QE | 100-000001353(FP7r2), 100-000001381(FP7) |

The two chips share several specifications: both are active production parts, both support ECC memory, both use dual-channel memory buses at 89.6 GB/s, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. Both processors also sit at the 87th percentile among all CPUs in the database, indicating comparable overall standing despite their different architectures and market segments.