AMD Ryzen 5 150 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 338H Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 150 records an average benchmark score of 34881, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H scores 33989. The AMD part sits slightly ahead in aggregate, though both land in the 84th percentile among all CPUs in the database.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H scores 4180 in PassMark single-thread testing, which is 24.5% higher than the AMD Ryzen 5 150's 3155. This is one of the clearest separations between the two processors.

Q: Which processor has the larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H carries 18 MB of shared L3 cache, while the AMD Ryzen 5 150 has 16 MB. Intel also leads in L1 and L2 cache per core, with 192 KB and 2.5 MB respectively versus AMD's 64 KB and 512 KB.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth figures for each chip?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H supports LPDDR5X memory with a dual-channel bus delivering 136.5 GB/s. The AMD Ryzen 5 150 supports DDR5 with a dual-channel bus rated at 76.8 GB/s. Intel's memory bandwidth is roughly 78% higher.

Q: Which processor wins the most head-to-head benchmark comparisons?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H wins all 11 recorded head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the AMD Ryzen 5 150. The AMD chip records zero wins across the tested workloads.

Q: What process nodes do the two processors use?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 150 is built on TSMC's 6 nm process, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H uses Intel's 3 nm process. The Intel chip also has a smaller thermal design power at 25 W versus AMD's 35 W.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 5 150 and Intel Core Ultra 5 338H diverge sharply in their fundamental design philosophies. AMD employs a 6-core, 12-thread configuration based on the Zen 3+ architecture, codenamed Rembrandt-R. This is a mature design that uses a monolithic die measuring 210 mm², fabricated by TSMC on a 6 nm node. The Intel part, by contrast, is a 12-core, 12-thread processor built on the Panther Lake architecture, fabricated on Intel's 3 nm process. The core counts differ significantly: Intel has twice as many physical cores, but because it does not support simultaneous multithreading, both processors end up with 12 threads total.

Cache hierarchies reveal another major split. The AMD chip allocates 64 KB of L1 cache and 512 KB of L2 cache per core, with a shared 16 MB L3 pool. Intel's Panther Lake design provides 192 KB of L1 cache and 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, plus an 18 MB shared L3 cache. The Intel per-core L2 allocation is five times larger than AMD's, which helps explain its strong showing in cache-sensitive workloads.

Memory support differs as well. AMD pairs with DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, achieving 76.8 GB/s of bandwidth. Intel opts for LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, but rated at 136.5 GB/s. The bandwidth advantage is substantial and appears in benchmark results that stress data movement. PCIe connectivity also favors AMD in terms of lane count: 20 Gen 4 lanes on the CPU, versus Intel's 4 Gen 5 lanes. However, Gen 5 lanes offer higher per-lane throughput, so the practical difference depends on the workload.

Integrated graphics take different paths. AMD includes Radeon 660M graphics, while Intel ships Arc B370 graphics. The socket situation is entirely separate: AMD uses Socket FP7, Intel uses BGA 2540. Both processors are mobile parts with active production status, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The AMD chip released on September 30, 2025, while Intel's part arrived on January 4, 2026. Neither processor has a recorded launch MSRP in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data paints a one-sided picture. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H wins every single comparison, but the margin varies widely by workload type. The smallest gap appears in PassMark integer math, where Intel scores 64934 against AMD's 62151, a 4.3% advantage. This suggests that in purely integer-heavy integer operations, the two processors are nearly comparable, with AMD's higher base clock of 3.30 GHz versus Intel's 1.90 GHz partially compensating for architectural differences.

The largest gap appears in PassMark find prime numbers, where Intel scores 304 versus AMD's 47, an 84.5% difference. This workload is highly sensitive to cache size and memory latency, and Intel's larger per-core L2 cache and higher memory bandwidth likely drive this extreme result. Floating point math shows a 58.2% Intel lead: 84067 versus 35118. Physics testing follows a similar pattern, with Intel at 2697 versus AMD's 806, a 70.1% margin.

In multithreaded PassMark testing, Intel posts 28717 against AMD's 17492, a 39.1% advantage. This is notable because both chips have 12 threads, so the difference comes from per-thread efficiency and memory subsystem performance rather than thread count. Data compression shows Intel ahead by 23.6% (276539 versus 211289), while data encryption favors Intel by 37.2% (21367 versus 13425). Extended instructions, a workload that leverages AVX and similar features, sees Intel at 23906 versus AMD's 14675, a 38.6% margin. Random string sorting gives Intel a 34.3% edge (34082 versus 22382).

Single-thread performance, often a strong indicator of everyday responsiveness, shows Intel at 4180 versus AMD's 3155, a 24.5% difference. This aligns with the boost clock figures: Intel reaches 4.70 GHz versus AMD's 4.55 GHz, and Intel's newer 3 nm process likely contributes to higher sustained single-core performance.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H outperforms the AMD Ryzen 5 150 across every recorded workload. The Intel chip wins all 11 head-to-head comparisons, with margins ranging from 4.3% in integer math to 84.5% in prime number finding. The average benchmark scores tell a slightly different story, with AMD at 34881 and Intel at 33989, but that aggregate figure includes a broader set of tests beyond the head-to-head set. In the direct comparisons, Intel's dominance is complete.

For users who prioritize raw performance in compute-heavy tasks, the Intel part is the clear choice. Its advantages in floating point, physics simulation, and multithreaded workloads are substantial, often exceeding 50%. The Intel chip also leads in single-thread performance, which matters for responsiveness in everyday applications. Memory bandwidth is another Intel strength, with 136.5 GB/s versus AMD's 76.8 GB/s, and this shows up in data-intensive benchmarks like compression and encryption.

The AMD Ryzen 5 150 does have its own merits. It records a higher average benchmark score overall, driven by its performance in tests outside the head-to-head set. Its 35 W TDP is higher than Intel's 25 W, which may allow for higher sustained clocks in some scenarios, though the data does not confirm this. The AMD chip also offers more PCIe lanes (20 Gen 4 versus 4 Gen 5), which could matter for users connecting multiple peripherals. For workloads where integer math dominates, the AMD chip is nearly on par with Intel, trailing by only 4.3%.

The verdict depends on the use case. Users who need maximum throughput in scientific, rendering, or data-processing workloads should choose Intel. Users who value a more balanced aggregate score, or who have workloads that align with AMD's strengths in the broader benchmark suite, may find the Ryzen 5 150 adequate. However, in the head-to-head tests recorded in the database, Intel wins every round.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field. The AMD Ryzen 5 150 has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has 12 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks differ: AMD runs at 3.30 GHz, Intel at 1.90 GHz. Boost clocks favor Intel: 4.70 GHz versus 4.55 GHz. Thermal design power is lower on Intel: 25 W versus 35 W. Sockets are incompatible: AMD uses Socket FP7, Intel uses BGA 2540.

Architecture and process node separate the chips entirely. AMD uses Zen 3+ on a 6 nm TSMC process, with a die size of 210 mm². Intel uses Panther Lake on a 3 nm Intel process, with no recorded die size. Cache configurations differ at every level: AMD has 64 KB L1 and 512 KB L2 per core, Intel has 192 KB L1 and 2.5 MB L2 per core. Shared L3 is 16 MB on AMD, 18 MB on Intel.

Memory support diverges: AMD uses DDR5, Intel uses LPDDR5X. Both are dual-channel, but bandwidth differs: 76.8 GB/s for AMD, 136.5 GB/s for Intel. PCIe implementations differ: AMD provides 20 Gen 4 lanes, Intel provides 4 Gen 5 lanes. Integrated graphics are distinct: Radeon 660M on AMD, Arc B370 on Intel. Neither supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. Release dates differ: AMD on September 30, 2025, Intel on January 4, 2026. Neither has a launch MSRP recorded.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H wins in every head-to-head category in the database, so the practical question is which workloads benefit most from its advantages. The largest margins come in prime number finding (84.5%), physics simulation (70.1%), and floating point math (58.2%). These workloads rely heavily on cache efficiency and memory bandwidth, both of which favor Intel. For users running scientific simulations, financial modeling, or any floating-point-heavy code, the Intel chip is decisively better.

Intel also excels in data encryption (37.2% ahead), extended instructions (38.6% ahead), and multithreaded performance (39.1% ahead). These results suggest strong AVX and SIMD execution, plus effective utilization of its 12 physical cores. Data compression and random string sorting, which stress memory throughput, show Intel leads by 23.6% and 34.3% respectively. Single-thread workloads favor Intel by 24.5%, making it the better choice for general application responsiveness.

The AMD Ryzen 5 150 does not win any head-to-head benchmark, but it comes closest in integer math, trailing by just 4.3%. This indicates that for integer-heavy integer workloads, such as database operations or certain types of code compilation, the AMD chip is competitive. Its higher base clock of 3.30 GHz may help in scenarios where sustained frequency matters more than peak boost. The AMD chip also has a higher average benchmark score overall (34881 versus 33989), suggesting that in tests not covered by the head-to-head set, it performs well.

For users with workloads that are not cache-bound and not floating-point-heavy, the AMD Ryzen 5 150 can be a reasonable pick. Its 6-core/12-thread design is sufficient for many productivity tasks, and its 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes provide more expansion headroom than Intel's 4 Gen 5 lanes. However, the database records no workload category where AMD wins outright. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H is the stronger choice for users who want the best recorded performance across the board, especially in compute-intensive and memory-sensitive applications.