AMD Ryzen 5 150 vs Intel Core Ultra 9 386H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark comparison between the AMD Ryzen 5 150 and the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H is dominated by Intel across every recorded test. The data shows 11 wins for the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H and 0 wins for the AMD Ryzen 5 150 in the head-to-head results. The largest gap appears in the prime number search workload, where Intel scores 341 against AMD's 47, a delta of -86.2% from Intel's perspective. That is the single most decisive margin in the entire comparison.

Floating-point math also shows a massive separation. The Intel chip records 108,527 versus AMD's 35,118, which is a 67.6% deficit for the AMD part. Physics simulation follows a similar pattern: Intel posts 3,028 while AMD manages 806, a 73.4% shortfall. These three workloads, prime numbers, floating point, and physics, all indicate that the Intel processor has a substantial throughput advantage in mathematically intensive tasks.

The multi-threaded PassMark score reinforces the overall picture. Intel reaches 35,399 while AMD sits at 17,492, a 50.6% difference. Data encryption shows the same relative margin: Intel scores 27,150 versus AMD's 13,425, also a 50.6% gap. Extended instruction set performance is nearly identical in relative terms, with Intel at 29,138 and AMD at 14,675, a 49.6% deficit.

Random string sorting favors Intel at 42,135 against AMD's 22,382, a 46.9% difference. Data compression gives Intel 352,365 versus AMD's 211,289, a 40% gap. Integer math is the closest of the multi-threaded workloads, with Intel scoring 87,284 and AMD 62,151, a 28.8% deficit. Even in single-threaded performance, where AMD's higher base clock might suggest competitiveness, Intel leads with 4,218 against AMD's 3,155, a 25.2% margin.

The average benchmark score for the Intel part sits at 43,210, compared to AMD's 34,881. The Intel processor also lands in the 88th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while AMD sits in the 84th percentile. Intel's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 at 43,326 (-0.3% delta), the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465 at 43,431 (-0.5% delta), and the Intel Core i9-12900 at 42,906 (0.7% delta). AMD's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 6349P at 34,890 (0% delta), the Intel Core 7 253PTE at 34,962 (-0.2% delta), the Intel Core i7-13800H at 34,988 (-0.3% delta), and the Intel Core i9-12900HX at 35,003 (-0.3% delta). This places the AMD part within a very tight cluster of mid-range mobile processors, while the Intel part competes with high-end desktop-class chips.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data gives the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H a clean sweep in head-to-head benchmarks, so the use-case split is defined by the magnitude of the advantage rather than by any workload where AMD takes the lead. For single-threaded responsiveness, Intel holds a 25.2% advantage, which is meaningful for lightly threaded applications such as web browsing, office productivity, and general system interaction. The AMD Ryzen 5 150 does not win this category but remains functional for those tasks at its recorded single-thread score of 3,155.

For heavily threaded content creation, the Intel part is decisively ahead. The multi-thread score of 35,399 versus AMD's 17,492 means rendering, video encoding, and compilation tasks will complete substantially faster on the Intel chip. The Cinebench results for Intel reinforce this: R23 multi-core at 20,547, R20 multi-core at 12,820, and R15 multi-core at 3,223. AMD has no Cinebench entries in the database, so the comparison there is one-sided.

Mathematical and scientific workloads favor Intel even more strongly. The prime number search score of 341 against AMD's 47 indicates a 7.3x raw ratio in that specific test. Floating-point math at 108,527 versus 35,118 shows a 3.1x advantage. Physics at 3,028 versus 806 shows a 3.8x advantage. These are workloads where the Intel processor's higher core count and newer architecture produce outsized gains.

For memory bandwidth-sensitive tasks, Intel also leads. The database records Intel's memory bandwidth at 115.2 GB/s versus AMD's 76.8 GB/s. This 38.4 GB/s difference contributes to the compression and encryption results, where Intel is 40% and 50.6% ahead respectively. The AMD part's lower bandwidth means it will be at a disadvantage in any workload that streams large datasets.

The AMD Ryzen 5 150 does have one structural advantage: its 35W TDP versus Intel's 25W TDP. However, the benchmark data does not include power efficiency metrics, so any thermal or energy claim must be limited to the recorded TDP values. The AMD part also uses a dual-channel DDR5 memory bus, same as Intel, but with a narrower bandwidth figure.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-threaded benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H scores 4,218 in PassMark single-thread testing, while the AMD Ryzen 5 150 scores 3,155. Intel leads by 25.2%.

Q: How large is the multi-threaded performance gap?

A: Intel scores 35,399 in PassMark multi-thread, AMD scores 17,492. The Intel part is 50.6% ahead, meaning it delivers roughly double the multi-threaded throughput in this test.

Q: Does the AMD processor win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison?

A: No. The head-to-head data records 11 wins for the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H and 0 wins for the AMD Ryzen 5 150.

Q: What is the difference in CPU core and thread counts?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 150 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Intel has more than twice the core count but no hyperthreading.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H boosts to 4.90 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen 5 150 boosts to 4.55 GHz. Intel's boost is 0.35 GHz higher.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare across the database?

A: Intel's average benchmark score is 43,210, placing it in the 88th percentile. AMD's average is 34,881, placing it in the 84th percentile.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. AMD uses 6 cores and 12 threads; Intel uses 16 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 3.30 GHz for AMD and 2.10 GHz for Intel, a 1.20 GHz difference in AMD's favor. Boost clocks are 4.55 GHz for AMD and 4.90 GHz for Intel, a 0.35 GHz difference in Intel's favor. TDP is 35W for AMD and 25W for Intel, a 10W difference.

Socket types are entirely different: AMD Socket FP7 versus Intel BGA 2540. Memory support also differs: AMD lists only DDR5, while Intel lists both DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Memory bandwidth is 76.8 GB/s for AMD and 115.2 GB/s for Intel. PCIe support differs as well: AMD has Gen 4 with 20 lanes, Intel has Gen 5 with 12 lanes.

Cache configurations diverge substantially. AMD's L1 cache is 64 KB per core, Intel's is 192 KB per core. AMD's L2 is 512 KB per core, Intel's is 2.5 MB per core. L3 cache is 16 MB shared for AMD and 18 MB shared for Intel. The integrated graphics differ: AMD uses Radeon 660M, Intel uses Intel Xe3 Graphics. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

The manufacturing process and foundry differ: AMD uses a 6 nm process from TSMC, Intel uses a 3 nm process from Intel's own foundry. AMD's die size is 210 mm², while Intel's die size is not recorded. The AMD part number is 100-000000990(FP7r2), and the Intel part number is SA4R5Q9EH. Both processors are locked (multiplier unlocked is false for both). Both are mobile market segments and both are active production parts.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is fundamental. AMD uses the Zen 3+ architecture, codenamed Rembrandt-R, while Intel uses the Panther Lake architecture with the same codename. AMD's generation is listed as Ryzen 5 (Zen 3+ (Rembrandt)), Intel's is Ultra 9 (Panther Lake-H). The process node difference is significant: AMD is on 6 nm TSMC, Intel is on 3 nm Intel. This is a three-generation process gap in Intel's favor.

Core organization differs beyond the raw counts. AMD's Zen 3+ design uses a smaller per-core L1 and L2 cache, while Intel's Panther Lake design uses much larger per-core caches. The L3 cache is only 2 MB larger on Intel, but the per-core cache differences are more pronounced. Intel's L2 cache at 2.5 MB per core is nearly five times larger than AMD's 512 KB per core.

The thread strategy is opposite. AMD uses simultaneous multithreading to deliver 12 threads from 6 cores. Intel runs 16 threads from 16 cores without SMT. This means Intel relies on physical core count for parallelism, while AMD relies on logical threads. The benchmark results show Intel's approach producing higher multi-threaded scores.

Memory architecture differs in bandwidth and supported types. Intel's dual-channel controller supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, with a peak bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. AMD's dual-channel controller supports DDR5 only, with a peak bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The 38.4 GB/s bandwidth advantage for Intel contributes to its leads in data compression and encryption tests.

PCIe generation also reflects the architectural gap. Intel supports Gen 5 with 12 CPU lanes, while AMD supports Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes. The newer PCIe standard on Intel offers higher per-lane bandwidth, though AMD provides more total lanes. Integrated graphics differ as well: Radeon 660M on AMD versus Intel Xe3 Graphics on Intel, though no graphics benchmarks are recorded in the database.

The production status for both is active, with release dates of 2025-09-30 for AMD and 2026-01-04 for Intel. Neither processor has a recorded launch MSRP. The Intel part belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3 family, while AMD's series field is null. Both processors are socketed differently, which precludes any direct platform compatibility between them.