AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX vs Intel Xeon 638 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear overall victory for the Intel Xeon 638, which wins 12 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX takes the remaining 5 wins. The most striking margin comes in the Passmark physics test, where the Xeon 638 scores 4704 against the Ryzen's 2168, a 117% advantage. That is the single largest delta in the entire comparison and points to a fundamental difference in how the two processors handle simulation and physics workloads.

Across the Cinebench suite, the Xeon 638 is consistently 10.5% ahead in every single test. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Xeon scores 47202 versus 42713 for the Ryzen. The single-core R23 result follows the same pattern: 6663 for the Xeon against 6030 for the Ryzen. The R20 and R15 tests show identical 10.5% deltas, meaning the Intel part's advantage is remarkably uniform across rendering generations. The Xeon also leads in Passmark multi-thread by 8.3%, scoring 55651 to the Ryzen's 51405.

The Ryzen 9 8945HX fights back in several specific workloads. Its biggest win is in Passmark data encryption, where it scores 40836 against the Xeon's 36030, an 11.8% advantage. The AMD part also wins Passmark single-thread with 3907 versus 3670, a 6.1% edge, and the duplicate singlethread entry shows the same result. In Passmark integer math, the Ryzen scores 195180 against 184884, a 5.3% win. Finally, in random string sorting, the Ryzen takes 78781 versus 74318, a 5.7% margin.

The Xeon's other wins are substantial. In Passmark extended instructions, it leads by 13.4% with 56498 against 49823. Floating point math shows a 23.2% gap in favor of Intel, with scores of 144757 versus 117453. Find prime numbers is another strong Intel result: 381 versus 262, a 45.4% difference. Data compression goes to the Xeon by 7.1%, with 725818 against 677755.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon 638 dominates rendering and compute-heavy workloads. Its uniform 10.5% lead across all Cinebench versions, from R15 through R23, in both single-core and multi-core, makes it the clear choice for 3D rendering, video encoding, and any task that relies on sustained CPU throughput. The physics test result, with its 117% advantage, further cements the Xeon as the processor for simulation, scientific computing, and any workload that stresses rigid body or particle physics calculations. The floating point math win by 23.2% reinforces this positioning, as does the 45.4% margin in prime number finding, which indicates stronger integer and algorithmic performance.

The Xeon also shows strength in data compression, leading by 7.1%, which matters for database workloads, backup operations, and file archiving. Its 13.4% edge in extended instructions suggests better support for advanced x86 instruction set extensions, which can accelerate cryptography, vector processing, and specialized enterprise applications.

The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX wins where encryption and certain memory-bound tasks are involved. The 11.8% lead in data encryption indicates the AMD part handles AES and related cryptographic workloads more efficiently. The Ryzen's single-thread win by 6.1% makes it slightly better for lightly threaded applications like legacy software, some game engines, and everyday productivity tasks that do not scale across many cores. The integer math win by 5.3% and the random string sorting win by 5.7% suggest the Ryzen has an edge in certain data manipulation and sorting tasks, which could benefit database indexing or log processing.

In short, the Xeon 638 is the heavy-compute champion, while the Ryzen 9 8945HX is the efficiency-oriented alternative that wins specific algorithmic and encryption benchmarks.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Xeon 638 has an average benchmark score of 80723, while the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX averages 76212. Both sit at the 95th percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Q: How much faster is the Xeon 638 in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Xeon 638 scores 47202 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, compared to 42713 for the Ryzen 9 8945HX, a 10.5% advantage for the Intel part.

Q: In which benchmark does the Ryzen 9 8945HX have its largest win?

A: The Ryzen 9 8945HX wins Passmark data encryption by 11.8%, scoring 40836 against the Xeon's 36030. This is its largest margin among the five tests it wins.

Q: What is the biggest single benchmark margin between the two processors?

A: The largest margin is in Passmark physics, where the Intel Xeon 638 scores 4704 against the Ryzen's 2168, a 117% difference in favor of Intel.

Q: Do both processors support DDR5 memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon 638 and the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX support DDR5 memory. However, the Xeon uses a quad-channel memory bus with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth, while the Ryzen uses dual-channel with 83.2 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX has a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, compared to 4.80 GHz for the Intel Xeon 638. Despite this, the Xeon wins most single-thread benchmarks, including Cinebench R23 single-core by 10.5%.

Specification Differences

The two processors share the same core and thread count, with 16 cores and 32 threads each, but diverge significantly in nearly every other specification. The Intel Xeon 638 has a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX runs at 2.50 GHz base and 5.40 GHz boost. Thermal design power differs drastically: the Xeon is rated at 180 W, while the Ryzen is rated at 55 W, reflecting their different market segments.

The Xeon 638 uses the Intel Socket 4710, while the Ryzen 9 8945HX uses AMD Socket FL1. Memory bandwidth favors Intel heavily: the Xeon supports quad-channel DDR5 with 204.8 GB/s, whereas the Ryzen supports dual-channel DDR5 with 83.2 GB/s. ECC memory is supported on the Xeon but not on the Ryzen.

PCIe lane counts also differ: the Xeon provides 80 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU, while the Ryzen provides 28 PCIe Gen 5 lanes. The Ryzen includes integrated Radeon 610M graphics, while the Xeon has no integrated graphics. The Ryzen's die size is listed as 2x 71 mm² with 13,140 million transistors, while the Xeon has a single 598 mm² die with no transistor count listed in the database.

The Xeon 638 carries a launch MSRP of $899 and was released on 2026-02-01, while the Ryzen 9 8945HX has no launch MSRP recorded and was released on 2025-04-22. Both processors have unlocked multipliers. The Xeon's part number is SA2DN, and the Ryzen's is 100-000001848.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Xeon 638 is built on Granite Rapids architecture, specifically the Xeon 600 (Granite Rapids-WS) generation. It uses a 5 nm process node fabricated by Intel. Cache distribution is generous: 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 72 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ryzen 9 8945HX uses Zen 4 architecture from the Dragon Range codename, part of the Ryzen 9 (Zen 4) generation. It also uses a 5 nm process node, but fabricated by TSMC. Its cache is smaller per core: 64 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 per core, with 64 MB of shared L3.

The Xeon's larger L2 cache per core, double that of the Ryzen, likely contributes to its strong performance in cache-sensitive workloads like the Passmark physics test. The Ryzen's smaller cache configuration is typical of mobile processors, where power and die size constraints are tighter. The Xeon's 598 mm² die is substantially larger than the Ryzen's dual 71 mm² chiplets, reflecting the server-focused design with more memory channels and PCIe lanes.

The market segments explain the architectural choices. The Xeon 638 is a Server/Workstation processor with active production status, while the Ryzen 9 8945HX is a Mobile processor, also active. The Xeon's 180 W TDP and quad-channel memory are designed for sustained heavy workloads, while the Ryzen's 55 W TDP suits laptop and mobile workstation enclosures. Both use DDR5, but the Xeon's memory bandwidth advantage of 204.8 GB/s versus 83.2 GB/s is among the largest specification gaps, directly impacting multi-threaded and memory-intensive benchmarks.