AMD EPYC 7443P vs Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus Comparison

The AMD EPYC 7443P and Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus represent two radically different answers to the question of what a 24-core processor should be. The EPYC is a server workhorse built for sustained throughput, while the Ultra 9 is a mobile flagship designed for burst performance and efficiency. Benchmark data reveals a fascinating split: Intel wins more individual tests (9 vs. 8), but AMD’s victories are often by dramatically larger margins, while Intel’s are frequently narrow. This creates a complex profile where the "better" processor depends entirely on the workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the entire dataset is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the AMD EPYC 7443P delivers a 190.2% advantage over the Intel chip. The EPYC scores 6837 against Intel’s 2356, an enormous gap that suggests the EPYC’s Zen 3 cores are highly optimized for this specific rendering workload. This is reinforced by the Cinebench R15 single-core test, where AMD wins by 102.6% (689 vs. 340). These are not marginal victories; they are generational-level differences in single-threaded rendering performance.

However, the story flips dramatically in the PassMark single-thread test. Here, the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus wins by 41.3%, scoring 4951 versus AMD’s 2907. This is a critical divergence: in Cinebench, AMD dominates single-core, but in PassMark, Intel is decisively ahead. This indicates that the two processors have fundamentally different architectural strengths, with AMD excelling in rendering-specific instruction paths and Intel leading in general-purpose integer and floating-point single-threaded work.

In multi-core Cinebench tests, the results are mixed. The Intel chip wins Cinebench R15 multicore by 18.4% (5981 vs. 4881) and Cinebench R20 multicore by a slim 4% (21198 vs. 20341). Yet in Cinebench R23 multicore, AMD turns the tables with a dominant 22% victory (48433 vs. 39684). This inconsistency across Cinebench versions suggests that the EPYC’s 48 threads (versus Intel’s 24) provide a scalability advantage in longer, more complex rendering workloads, while Intel’s higher boost clock of 5.50 GHz helps in shorter bursts.

The PassMark suite further illustrates the split. AMD wins big in integer math, scoring 232632 versus Intel’s 164839, a 41.1% advantage. AMD also leads in physics (4748 vs. 3387, a 40.2% win), data compression (820859 vs. 658724, a 24.6% win), data encryption (57263 vs. 50008, a 14.5% win), and random string sorting (95581 vs. 80327, a 19% win). These are substantial, workload-specific victories that point to AMD’s strengths in server-class tasks like database operations, compression, and cryptographic workloads.

Intel’s PassMark wins are also significant. The Ultra 9 leads floating-point math by 35.6% (201773 vs. 129932), extended instructions by 6% (51290 vs. 48213), and find prime numbers by 21% (519 vs. 410). The floating-point result is particularly notable, as it suggests Intel’s cores are better suited for scientific computing and simulation tasks. Intel also wins the overall PassMark multithread score by a narrow 4.1% (59439 vs. 56981), despite having half the threads, which highlights the efficiency of its 3 nm process node.

Architecture Differences

The two processors could not be more different in their underlying design philosophy. The AMD EPYC 7443P is built on the Zen 3 architecture (codenamed Milan) using a 7 nm process at TSMC. It features 24 cores and 48 threads, with a base clock of 2.85 GHz and a boost clock of 4.00 GHz. The EPYC’s cache hierarchy is notable for its massive 128 MB shared L3 cache, with 64 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core. It supports DDR4 memory across an eight-channel bus, providing 204.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The chip is designed for the AMD Socket SP3 and carries a 200 W TDP, targeting the server and workstation market segment.

In contrast, the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is a mobile processor from the Core Ultra Series 2, codenamed Arrow Lake-HX Refresh. It is built on a more advanced 3 nm process at TSMC and features 24 cores but only 24 threads — no simultaneous multithreading. Its base clock is 2.70 GHz, but it boosts to an impressive 5.50 GHz. The cache configuration is very different: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and a much smaller 36 MB shared L3 cache. Intel supports DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus, delivering 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth — roughly half of AMD’s. The Ultra 9 uses the Intel BGA 2114 socket and has a dramatically lower 55 W TDP, reflecting its mobile focus. It also includes integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU, which the EPYC lacks entirely.

The transistor counts also tell a story. Intel’s chip packs 17,800 million transistors into a 243 mm² die, while AMD’s EPYC uses 16,600 million transistors across a multi-die design (4x 81 mm²). Intel’s higher transistor count on a smaller process node explains its ability to hit much higher clock speeds and achieve superior single-threaded PassMark scores. AMD’s advantage lies in its massive L3 cache and eight-channel memory bus, which are classic server features designed for data-heavy workloads.

PCIe support is another differentiator. The EPYC offers Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only), enabling massive expansion for GPUs and NVMe drives. The Ultra 9 offers Gen 5 with just 20 lanes, which is more typical for a mobile platform. Both support ECC memory, but AMD’s eight-channel DDR4 configuration provides significantly more bandwidth than Intel’s dual-channel DDR5.

The Verdict

The data presents two distinct value propositions. The AMD EPYC 7443P is the clear choice for server and workstation environments where sustained multi-threaded performance in integer-heavy tasks, data compression, encryption, and physics simulations is paramount. Its 22% lead in Cinebench R23 multicore, 41.1% lead in integer math, and 40.2% lead in physics demonstrate its dominance in these areas. Furthermore, the EPYC’s 190.2% and 102.6% advantages in Cinebench single-core tests are staggering, making it the superior choice for rendering-focused applications that rely on single-threaded performance in that specific benchmark.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus, on the other hand, is the winner for mobile users and those who need strong floating-point performance or general-purpose single-threaded speed. Its 41.3% lead in PassMark single-thread and 35.6% lead in floating-point math are decisive. The Ultra 9 also wins the overall PassMark multithread score by 4.1%, despite having only 24 threads versus AMD’s 48, which confirms its architectural efficiency and high boost clocks. Its 55 W TDP makes it suitable for laptops, whereas the EPYC’s 200 W TDP requires a server platform.

The benchmark results indicate that the EPYC 7443P is the better overall performer in terms of average benchmark score (81661 vs. 79574), placing it in the 96th percentile versus the Ultra 9’s 95th percentile. However, the Ultra 9’s wins in 9 of 17 head-to-head tests show that it is a more versatile general-purpose chip. For a database server, compression engine, or physics simulation node, the EPYC is the data-backed choice. For a high-end mobile workstation that needs fast floating-point math and responsive single-threaded performance, the Ultra 9 wins.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7443P has 48 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 24 threads.

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The AMD EPYC 7443P is faster, scoring 48433 versus Intel’s 39684, a 22% advantage.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, compared to the AMD EPYC 7443P’s 4.00 GHz.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The AMD EPYC 7443P has 128 MB of shared L3 cache, whereas the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 36 MB.

Q: Which processor wins in PassMark floating-point math?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus wins, scoring 201773 versus AMD’s 129932, a 35.6% advantage.

Q: Does either processor have integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has integrated graphics (Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU). The AMD EPYC 7443P has none.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7443P is the definitive winner in workloads that leverage its 48 threads and massive 128 MB L3 cache. It dominates in integer math (41.1% ahead), physics simulations (40.2% ahead), and data compression (24.6% ahead). For database workloads, encryption tasks, and random string sorting, the EPYC’s advantages of 14.5% and 19% respectively make it the clear choice. Critically, the EPYC’s staggering leads in Cinebench R23 single-core (190.2% ahead) and R15 single-core (102.6% ahead) mean that for 3D rendering software that uses these benchmarks as a proxy, the EPYC is unmatched. Its eight-channel memory bus providing 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth is a server-grade feature that supports these data-intensive operations.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus wins in general-purpose computing tasks, especially those that rely on high clock speeds and floating-point arithmetic. Its 41.3% lead in PassMark single-thread performance makes it the better choice for responsive everyday applications, and its 35.6% lead in floating-point math is ideal for scientific computing and financial modeling. The Ultra 9 also excels in prime number finding (21% ahead) and extended instructions (6% ahead). Its 24 threads are sufficient to win the overall PassMark multithread score by 4.1%, and it wins Cinebench R15 and R20 multicore by 18.4% and 4% respectively. For a mobile workstation that needs to balance performance with a 55 W TDP, the Ultra 9 is the data-backed selection. Its support for DDR5 and PCIe Gen 5, while narrower than the EPYC’s, offers modern bandwidth for a mobile platform.