AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS vs Intel Xeon w3-2525 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a clear overall victory for the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS, which wins 13 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests. The Intel Xeon w3-2525 takes the remaining 4 wins, but the margins tell a more nuanced story than the raw win count suggests.

Starting with the Cinebench suite, the AMD processor is consistently ahead across all six tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ryzen scores 2476 against 2430 for the Xeon, a 1.9% lead. The single-core result is nearly identical in percentage terms: 349 versus 342, a 2% advantage. Moving to Cinebench R20, the AMD chip posts 10317 multi-core and 1456 single-core, while the Intel part manages 10129 and 1429 respectively, both again 1.9% in favor of AMD. The Cinebench R23 results follow the same pattern: 24565 versus 24117 multi-core and 3468 versus 3404 single-core, with the 1.9% delta repeating. These are narrow margins, indicating that in standard rendering workloads the two processors are essentially peers, with the Ryzen holding a slight but consistent edge.

The Passmark suite reveals where each processor has distinct strengths. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS dominates in several specific workloads. Its Passmark data encryption score of 20487 crushes the Xeon's 17086, a massive 19.9% advantage. Random string sorting also favors AMD heavily: 41867 versus 34933, a 19.8% lead. Integer math shows a 16.5% gap, with AMD scoring 97625 against the Intel's 83806. The single-thread test is another clear win for AMD, posting 3762 versus 3426, a 9.8% difference. Data compression is closer, with AMD ahead by just 0.7% (343952 versus 341629), and the multithread test likewise shows only a 0.7% gap (28572 versus 28373).

The Intel Xeon w3-2525 fights back in four areas, and those wins are often by larger margins. The most dramatic is the find prime numbers test, where Intel scores 129 against AMD's 87, a 32.6% blowout. Physics simulation also goes strongly to Intel: 1901 versus 1389, a 26.9% lead. Floating point math shows Intel ahead by 13.6% (68230 versus 58965), and extended instructions favor Intel by 8.8% (27882 versus 25434). These results indicate that the Xeon's architecture is substantially better suited to certain mathematical and physics-based workloads, even while losing the overall benchmark count.

When looking at the average benchmark score, the Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS records 39325 versus the Xeon's 38392. Both processors sit at the 86th percentile among all CPUs in the database. The AMD part's nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 4245P (0.3% higher average score), the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450 (0.4% lower), and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS (0.7% lower). The Intel Xeon's nearest rivals are the Intel Core 9 270H (0.1% higher), the Intel Core Ultra 9 285H (0.2% higher), and the Intel Core i5-13600HX (0.3% higher). This places both chips in a tightly competitive mid-to-upper tier, with the AMD part holding a roughly 2.4% overall average score advantage.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS boosts to 5.10 GHz, while the Intel Xeon w3-2525 reaches 4.50 GHz. The AMD part also has a higher base clock at 3.80 GHz versus 3.50 GHz.

Q: How do the two chips compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS scores 24565, which is 1.9% ahead of the Intel Xeon w3-2525's 24117. This is a narrow margin that repeats across the entire Cinebench suite.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon have any benchmark where it wins by a large margin?

A: Yes, the find prime numbers test shows Intel ahead by 32.6%, scoring 129 versus AMD's 87. Physics simulation is also a strong Intel result at 26.9% ahead (1901 versus 1389).

Q: What is the biggest single benchmark advantage for the AMD processor?

A: Data encryption shows AMD ahead by 19.9%, with a score of 20487 versus 17086. Random string sorting is nearly identical at 19.8% in AMD's favor.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS and the Intel Xeon w3-2525 list ECC memory support as true.

Q: Which processor has a higher memory bandwidth rating?

A: The Intel Xeon w3-2525 has a higher rated memory bandwidth at 140.8 GB/s, compared to 89.6 GB/s for the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS. The Xeon also uses a quad-channel memory bus, while the AMD part uses dual-channel.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS is built on the Zen 4 architecture with the codename Hawk Point, part of the 8000 series. It uses a 4 nm process node manufactured by TSMC, with 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The Intel Xeon w3-2525 uses the Sapphire Rapids architecture on a 10 nm node from Intel's own foundry, with no transistor or die size figures recorded in the database.

Both chips have 8 cores and 16 threads, so the parallel execution capacity is identical on paper. The cache hierarchies differ notably. The AMD part has 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, with 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Xeon has larger per-core caches: 80 KB of L1 per core and 2 MB of L2 per core, plus 22.5 MB of L3 cache. This larger cache structure likely contributes to the Intel part's wins in physics and floating point workloads, where repeated data access patterns benefit from more on-die storage.

The memory controllers also diverge. AMD supports DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and a rated bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. Intel also supports DDR5 but with a quad-channel bus, achieving 140.8 GB/s. That is a substantial bandwidth advantage for the Xeon, and it shows in certain memory-sensitive tests even though the overall benchmark results favor AMD.

PCIe connectivity is another major difference. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS provides PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The Intel Xeon w3-2525 offers PCIe Gen 5 with 64 lanes. This makes the Xeon far more capable for expansion-heavy workstation builds, while the AMD part is clearly oriented toward mobile platforms. The integrated graphics also differ completely: AMD includes Radeon 780M graphics, while the Intel Xeon has no integrated graphics at all.

The market segments confirm this split. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS is classified as a mobile processor, using the AMD Socket FP7, and it has a TDP of 45 watts. The Intel Xeon w3-2525 is a server/workstation chip on Intel Socket 4677 with a TDP of 175 watts. The release dates are also distinct: the AMD part launched on 2024-04-15, while the Intel Xeon arrived later on 2024-08-23.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show several direct differences between the two processors. The base clock is 3.80 GHz for the AMD part versus 3.50 GHz for the Intel Xeon. Boost clocks are 5.10 GHz and 4.50 GHz respectively. The TDP is dramatically different: 45 watts for the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS versus 175 watts for the Intel Xeon w3-2525.

The sockets are incompatible: AMD Socket FP7 for the Ryzen, Intel Socket 4677 for the Xeon. Process nodes differ at 4 nm for AMD (TSMC foundry) versus 10 nm for Intel (Intel foundry). The AMD part has a recorded transistor count of 25,000 million and a die size of 178 mm², while the Intel part has no transistor or die size data recorded. L1 cache is 64 KB per core for AMD and 80 KB per core for Intel. L2 cache is 1 MB per core versus 2 MB per core. L3 cache is 16 MB shared for AMD versus 22.5 MB for Intel. Memory bus is dual-channel for AMD and quad-channel for Intel. Memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s versus 140.8 GB/s. PCIe is Gen 4 with 20 lanes for AMD versus Gen 5 with 64 lanes for Intel. Integrated graphics are present on the AMD part (Radeon 780M) and absent on the Intel part. The launch MSRP for the Intel Xeon is $609, while no launch MSRP is recorded for the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS.

The Verdict

The data points to the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS as the better overall performer in the recorded benchmark suite. It wins 13 of 17 tests and holds a higher average benchmark score of 39325 versus 38392 for the Intel Xeon w3-2525. The AMD part's wins in data encryption, random string sorting, integer math, and single-thread performance are substantial, with margins ranging from 9.8% to 19.9%. Its Cinebench results, while narrow, are consistently ahead across all three versions of the test.

The Intel Xeon w3-2525 is not without merit. Its wins in find prime numbers (32.6% ahead), physics (26.9% ahead), and floating point math (13.6% ahead) demonstrate clear superiority in specialized computational workloads. The Xeon also offers a higher memory bandwidth rating at 140.8 GB/s, quad-channel memory, and PCIe Gen 5 with 64 lanes, which are significant advantages for workstation-grade expansion and data movement. Its larger L2 and L3 caches likely underpin its wins in cache-sensitive math workloads.

However, the practical verdict depends on the use case. For mobile platforms, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS is the only viable choice given its socket, 45 watt TDP, and integrated graphics. For a workstation or server environment where the 175 watt TDP is acceptable, the Intel Xeon w3-2525 offers specific advantages in physics, prime number computation, and floating point math, along with far superior memory bandwidth and PCIe expansion. The AMD part remains the better all-around performer in the recorded benchmarks, but the Xeon's specialized strengths and platform capabilities should not be ignored.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS wins in general-purpose and everyday compute tasks. Its single-thread score of 3762 versus 3426 (9.8% ahead) indicates snappier responsiveness in lightly threaded applications. Data encryption at 19.9% ahead makes it the stronger choice for security-related workloads. Random string sorting at 19.8% ahead suggests better performance in data processing and text manipulation tasks. Integer math at 16.5% ahead points to advantages in general arithmetic-heavy code. The Cinebench suite wins, though narrow, show that the Ryzen holds an edge in standard rendering workloads as well. Its integrated Radeon 780M graphics also mean it can handle display output without a discrete GPU, which is critical for mobile systems.

The Intel Xeon w3-2525 wins in specialized numerical and physics-based workloads. The 32.6% lead in find prime numbers makes it the clear choice for cryptography-related or number-theoretic computations. Physics simulation at 26.9% ahead indicates strong performance in simulation and dynamics applications. Floating point math at 13.6% ahead suits scientific computing and engineering analysis. Extended instructions at 8.8% ahead suggest better support for vectorized and specialized instruction sets. The Xeon's quad-channel memory and 140.8 GB/s bandwidth, along with PCIe Gen 5 and 64 lanes, make it the superior platform for memory-intensive workstation tasks and multi-GPU or high-speed storage configurations. Its 22.5 MB L3 cache and larger per-core L1 and L2 caches provide the data capacity that these math-heavy workloads require.