AMD Ryzen 5 220 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 366H Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H has 16 cores and 16 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 5 220 has 6 cores and 12 threads. Intel’s chip uses a higher core count without simultaneous multithreading, whereas AMD relies on 12 threads from 6 physical cores.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H leads in every recorded single-core test. In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 4020 against AMD’s 2188, a 45.6% advantage. PassMark single-thread shows Intel at 4043 versus AMD’s 3646, a narrower 9.8% gap.

Q: What are the process nodes used by each chip?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 220 is built on TSMC’s 4 nm process, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H uses Intel’s 3 nm node. Intel’s process is one step smaller in the recorded data.

Q: Which processor has the larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache, compared to 16 MB on the AMD Ryzen 5 220. Intel also has larger per-core L1 and L2 caches.

Q: Do both chips support DDR5 memory?

A: Yes, both support DDR5. The Intel chip also supports LPDDR5X, while the AMD chip lists DDR5 only. Memory bandwidth differs: Intel records 115.2 GB/s, AMD records 89.6 GB/s.

Q: What are the integrated graphics solutions?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 220 uses Radeon 740M graphics, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics. Both are integrated, but the database does not include graphics benchmark numbers for either.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data shows a clean sweep: the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H wins all 17 head-to-head tests. There is no measured workload where the AMD Ryzen 5 220 takes the lead. This includes Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both multi-core and single-core modes, plus every PassMark subtest from data compression to floating-point math.

For single-threaded tasks, the Intel advantage is smaller but still consistent. PassMark single-thread shows Intel ahead by 9.8%, while Cinebench R23 single-core shows a much larger 45.6% margin. The gap widens considerably in multi-threaded workloads. Cinebench R23 multi-core records Intel at 28477 versus AMD’s 15502, a 45.6% difference. PassMark multithread shows Intel at 33429 versus AMD’s 18582, a 44.4% lead.

The most extreme difference appears in passmark_find_prime_numbers, where Intel scores 326 versus AMD’s 65, an 80.1% advantage. Floating-point math also heavily favors Intel: 103615 versus 35500, a 65.7% gap. Physics simulation follows a similar pattern, with Intel at 2880 versus AMD’s 983, a 65.9% difference.

If the use case is purely multi-core rendering, compilation, or heavy math, the Intel chip dominates by margins ranging from roughly 30% to over 80%. For lighter single-threaded workloads like everyday productivity or basic scripting, the Intel chip still wins, but the gap narrows to single-digit percentages in the PassMark single-thread test.

The AMD Ryzen 5 220 does not hold a single recorded win. Its only relative strength is the smaller single-thread deficit in PassMark, but even that remains a loss. Users seeking any AMD advantage would need to look outside these benchmark results.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 5 220 uses the Zen 4 architecture under the Hawk Point codename. It is built on TSMC’s 4 nm process with 20,900 million transistors on a 137 mm² die. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H uses the Panther Lake architecture, built on Intel’s 3 nm process. The database does not list transistor count or die size for the Intel chip.

Core organization differs fundamentally. AMD implements 6 cores with 12 threads, meaning each physical core supports two threads. Intel implements 16 cores with 16 threads, meaning each core handles one thread. The core count advantage for Intel is substantial, but AMD’s simultaneous multithreading partially compensates on a per-core basis.

Cache hierarchy also diverges. AMD uses 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. Intel uses 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. Intel’s larger per-core caches and slightly larger L3 give it more on-die data capacity.

The integrated graphics differ in branding and generation. AMD pairs its CPU with Radeon 740M, while Intel uses Xe3 Graphics. Memory support shows Intel accepting both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, whereas AMD lists DDR5 only. Memory bandwidth reflects this: Intel records 115.2 GB/s, AMD records 89.6 GB/s.

PCIe capabilities also differ. AMD provides Gen 4 with 14 lanes from the CPU. Intel provides Gen 5 with 12 lanes from the CPU. Intel’s newer PCIe standard offers higher per-lane bandwidth, though with fewer total lanes.

Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier. Both target the mobile market segment. AMD uses Socket FP8, while Intel uses BGA 2540. Production status for both is listed as active.

The release dates differ by roughly one year. AMD’s Ryzen 5 220 launched on January 5, 2025. Intel’s Core Ultra 7 366H launched on January 4, 2026.

Specification Differences

Clock speeds differ in both base and boost. The AMD Ryzen 5 220 has a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. AMD starts higher but boosts only 0.1 GHz higher.

Thermal design power shows Intel at 25 W versus AMD at 28 W. Despite the higher TDP, AMD delivers fewer cores and threads. The power envelope difference is small.

Core and thread counts differ: AMD has 6 cores and 12 threads, Intel has 16 cores and 16 threads. This is the single largest specification gap.

Cache sizes differ across all levels. AMD’s L1 is 64 KB per core, Intel’s is 192 KB per core. AMD’s L2 is 1 MB per core, Intel’s is 2.5 MB per core. AMD’s L3 is 16 MB shared, Intel’s is 18 MB shared.

Memory bandwidth differs: AMD records 89.6 GB/s, Intel records 115.2 GB/s. Both use dual-channel memory buses.

Process node differs: AMD uses 4 nm from TSMC, Intel uses 3 nm from its own foundry.

PCIe generation and lane count differ: AMD Gen 4 with 14 lanes, Intel Gen 5 with 12 lanes.

Integrated graphics names differ: Radeon 740M versus Intel Xe3 Graphics.

Socket types differ completely: AMD Socket FP8 versus Intel BGA 2540.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H wins every recorded comparison, but the margin varies significantly across test types.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, Intel scores 2870 against AMD’s 1562, a 45.6% lead. The single-core R15 test shows Intel at 405 versus AMD’s 220, also a 45.7% gap. These percentages are nearly identical across all three Cinebench versions. R20 multi-core: Intel 11960, AMD 6510, 45.6% difference. R20 single-core: Intel 1688, AMD 918, 45.6% difference. R23 multi-core: Intel 28477, AMD 15502, 45.6% difference. R23 single-core: Intel 4020, AMD 2188, 45.6% difference.

The consistency of these deltas suggests that the Cinebench workloads scale almost linearly with the core and thread advantage, plus a fixed single-core performance gap that carries through all three versions.

PassMark results show more variation. Data compression favors Intel at 327455 versus 212739, a 35% lead. Data encryption shows Intel at 25845 versus 12493, a 51.7% gap. Extended instructions: Intel 26901, AMD 15512, 42.3% difference.

The largest single margin is in prime number finding. Intel scores 326 versus AMD’s 65, an 80.1% advantage. This workload likely stresses integer recursion and branch prediction, areas where Intel’s newer architecture and higher core count provide outsized gains.

Floating-point math also heavily favors Intel: 103615 versus 35500, a 65.7% gap. Physics simulation shows Intel at 2880 versus AMD’s 983, a 65.9% difference. Integer math presents a smaller but still decisive margin: Intel 83695, AMD 57987, 30.7% lead.

Multithreaded performance in PassMark gives Intel 33429 versus AMD’s 18582, a 44.4% gap. Random string sorting: Intel 39814, AMD 25433, 36.1% difference.

The closest recorded test is PassMark single-thread. Intel scores 4043, AMD scores 3646, a 9.8% gap. This is the only benchmark where the two chips fall within single-digit percentage points. It indicates that for a purely sequential workload, the Intel chip is only modestly faster, whereas in heavily parallel or math-intensive tasks, the gap expands dramatically.

The overall average benchmark score reinforces this picture. AMD’s Ryzen 5 220 averages 22289 across all recorded tests, placing at the 75th percentile of all CPUs. Intel’s Core Ultra 7 366H averages 41263, placing at the 87th percentile. Intel’s average score is roughly 85% higher than AMD’s, which aligns with the multi-core deltas.

Nearest rivals in the database contextualize each chip. AMD’s Ryzen 5 220 sits within 1.4% of the Intel Core i7-10700K, Intel Core i5-13500H, Intel Core i7-1270P, and AMD Ryzen 5 3600X. The closest match is the Core i7-10700K at 0.3% difference. Intel’s Core Ultra 7 366H sits within 0.7% of the Core Ultra 7 356H, Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440, Ryzen 9 5900X, and Core Ultra X7 358H. The closest match is the Core Ultra 7 356H at 0.1% difference.

The Verdict

The data presents an unambiguous outcome. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H outperforms the AMD Ryzen 5 220 in every single benchmark recorded in the database. There are zero wins for AMD across all 17 head-to-head tests, and Intel claims a 100% win rate.

For multi-threaded workloads, the choice is clear. Intel’s 16 cores and 16 threads, combined with larger caches and higher memory bandwidth, deliver consistent 30% to 80% advantages over AMD’s 6 cores and 12 threads. Rendering, video encoding, compilation, and scientific computing all fall into this category. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 28477 versus 15502 represents a 45.6% improvement, which is substantial for any production workload.

For single-threaded tasks, the Intel chip still wins, but the margin narrows. PassMark single-thread shows only a 9.8% difference. This suggests that everyday office work, web browsing, and light coding would see a noticeable but not overwhelming performance uplift on the Intel platform.

The AMD Ryzen 5 220 does offer a slightly higher boost clock of 4.90 GHz versus Intel’s 4.80 GHz, and a lower TDP of 28 W versus 25 W, but neither specification translates into a benchmark victory. AMD’s smaller core count and lower memory bandwidth place it at a structural disadvantage that clock speed cannot overcome.

The percentile rankings confirm the gap. AMD sits at the 75th percentile of all CPUs, while Intel sits at the 87th percentile. The average benchmark scores differ by roughly 85%, which is consistent with the multi-core results.

For a buyer choosing between these two mobile processors, the database points exclusively toward the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H. Any workload that benefits from more cores, more cache, or higher memory bandwidth will favor Intel. Even single-threaded performance, where AMD typically competes well, shows Intel ahead. The only scenario where AMD appears competitive is the narrow PassMark single-thread margin, but that still results in an Intel win.

The Intel chip also offers a newer PCIe generation (Gen 5 versus Gen 4), support for LPDDR5X memory, and a smaller process node. These architectural advantages do not appear directly in the benchmark scores but may matter for platform longevity and peripheral bandwidth.

There is no recorded scenario where the AMD Ryzen 5 220 should be selected based on performance data. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H delivers higher scores in every measured category, from Cinebench rendering to PassMark math and encryption. The verdict from the database is straightforward: Intel wins outright.