AMD Ryzen 5 220 vs Intel Core Ultra 9 386H Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has 16 cores and 16 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 5 220 has 6 cores and 12 threads.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H wins most single-thread tests, including PassMark single-thread at 4218 versus 3646 for the AMD chip, a 13.6% lead. However, the AMD Ryzen 5 220 wins Cinebench R23 single-core, scoring 2188 versus 2071.5 for Intel, a 5.6% advantage.

Q: What is the difference in average benchmark scores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has an average benchmark score of 43210, while the AMD Ryzen 5 220 scores 22289. The Intel part sits at the 88th percentile of all CPUs, the AMD part at the 75th percentile.

Q: Which processor has a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H uses a 3 nm process from Intel, while the AMD Ryzen 5 220 uses a 4 nm process from TSMC.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 220 supports DDR5, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, compared to 89.6 GB/s for the AMD Ryzen 5 220.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 5 220 is built on the Zen 4 architecture with the Hawk Point codename, manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It integrates 20,900 million transistors on a 137 mm² die. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H uses the Panther Lake architecture, also its codename, on Intel's 3 nm process. The database records no transistor count or die size for the Intel part.

Core configurations differ sharply. The AMD processor offers 6 cores and 12 threads, relying on simultaneous multithreading to double its thread count. The Intel processor provides 16 cores and 16 threads, with no SMT, meaning each core maps to one thread. Despite having more than double the core count, the Intel chip has no thread advantage beyond its core count.

Cache hierarchies also diverge. The AMD part has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The Intel part has 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 larger shared L3 give it more on-die data capacity.

Memory support differs in scope. AMD lists DDR5 only, while Intel supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but Intel's 115.2 GB/s bandwidth exceeds AMD's 89.6 GB/s. PCIe connectivity also differs: AMD provides Gen 4 with 14 CPU lanes, while Intel provides Gen 5 with 12 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The AMD Ryzen 5 220 uses a Radeon 740M, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics. Both processors target the mobile market segment and are currently listed as Active in production. The AMD part launched on 2025-01-05, while the Intel part launched on 2026-01-04. Neither processor has a recorded launch MSRP in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H dominates the head-to-head results, winning 16 of the 17 recorded comparisons. The single AMD win comes in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Ryzen 5 220 scores 2188 against 2071.5 for Intel, a 5.6% advantage. This is the only test where the AMD chip leads.

Multi-core performance heavily favors Intel. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, Intel scores 3223 versus 1562 for AMD, a 51.5% lead. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows a similar gap: 12820 versus 6510, a 49.2% difference. Cinebench R23 multi-core narrows the margin somewhat, with Intel at 20547 and AMD at 15502, a 24.6% lead.

The largest deltas appear in specialized PassMark workloads. PassMark find prime numbers shows Intel at 341 versus AMD at 65, an 80.9% difference. PassMark physics gives Intel 3028 against AMD's 983, a 67.5% lead. PassMark floating point math records 108527 for Intel and 35500 for AMD, a 67.3% gap.

Integer and encryption workloads also favor Intel substantially. PassMark integer math: 87284 versus 57987, a 33.6% lead. PassMark data encryption: 27150 versus 12493, a 54% lead. PassMark extended instructions: 29138 versus 15512, a 46.8% gap.

Memory and data-related tasks show consistent Intel advantages. PassMark data compression scores 352365 for Intel and 212739 for AMD, a 39.6% difference. PassMark random string sorting records 42135 versus 25433, also a 39.6% gap. PassMark multithread shows 35399 against 18582, a 47.5% lead.

Single-core results outside Cinebench R23 favor Intel. Cinebench R15 single-core: 303.5 versus 220, a 27.5% lead. Cinebench R20 single-core: 1809 versus 918, a 49.3% difference. PassMark single-thread: 4218 versus 3646, a 13.6% lead.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification field. Core count: 6 for AMD, 16 for Intel. Thread count: 12 for AMD, 16 for Intel. Base clocks: 3.20 GHz for AMD, 2.10 GHz for Intel. Boost clocks are identical at 4.90 GHz for both. TDP: 28 W for AMD, 25 W for Intel.

Sockets differ: AMD uses Socket FP8, Intel uses BGA 2540. Process nodes: 4 nm for AMD, 3 nm for Intel. Foundries: TSMC for AMD, Intel for Intel. The AMD part has a recorded transistor count of 20,900 million and a die size of 137 mm²; the Intel part has neither recorded.

Cache configurations differ in every level. L1: 64 KB per core for AMD, 192 KB per core for Intel. L2: 1 MB per core for AMD, 2.5 MB per core for Intel. L3: 16 MB shared for AMD, 18 MB shared for Intel.

Memory support: DDR5 for AMD, DDR5 and LPDDR5X for Intel. Memory bandwidth: 89.6 GB/s for AMD, 115.2 GB/s for Intel. PCIe generation and lane count: Gen 4 with 14 lanes for AMD, Gen 5 with 12 lanes for Intel. Integrated graphics: Radeon 740M for AMD, Intel Xe3 Graphics for Intel.

Both processors have locked multipliers, no ECC memory support, and target the mobile segment. Release dates differ by roughly a year: AMD on 2025-01-05, Intel on 2026-01-04. Neither has a launch MSRP in the database. The AMD part number is 100-000001611; the Intel part number is SA4R5Q9EH.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows a clear overall winner: the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H. Its average benchmark score of 43210 is nearly double the AMD Ryzen 5 220's 22289. The Intel part sits at the 88th percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 75th percentile for AMD. In head-to-head comparisons, Intel wins 16 of 17 tests, with margins ranging from 5.6% to 80.9%.

The AMD Ryzen 5 220 holds one meaningful advantage: Cinebench R23 single-core performance, where it beats Intel by 5.6%. It also carries a lower TDP of 28 W versus 25 W for Intel, though the difference is small. For users prioritizing that specific single-core rendering workload, the AMD part has a measurable edge.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H is the stronger processor for multi-threaded work. Its 16 cores, larger caches, faster memory bandwidth, and higher single-thread scores across most tests translate into dominant wins in rendering, encryption, compression, and math workloads. The database places it among rivals like the Intel Core i9-12900 and i9-12900KF, with a 0.7% and 0.9% lead respectively.

For raw performance across a broad workload mix, the data favors Intel without qualification. The AMD chip competes only in narrow single-core scenarios and even there loses most tests to Intel. The verdict from the numbers is straightforward: choose Intel for nearly all compute-heavy tasks, and consider AMD only when the Cinebench R23 single-core result matters most.

Where Each One Wins

Intel Core Ultra 9 386H, dominant across the board. The Intel processor wins every multi-threaded benchmark in the database. It leads Cinebench R15 multi-core by 51.5%, R20 multi-core by 49.2%, and R23 multi-core by 24.6%. PassMark multithread shows a 47.5% advantage. These results make it the clear choice for rendering, video encoding, and any workload that scales across cores.

Intel also wins most single-thread tests. PassMark single-thread shows Intel ahead by 13.6%, Cinebench R15 single-core by 27.5%, and Cinebench R20 single-core by 49.3%. The Intel core architecture delivers higher per-thread performance in the majority of recorded tests, despite the identical 4.90 GHz boost clock on both chips.

Intel wins all specialized compute workloads. Data compression favors Intel by 39.6%, data encryption by 54%, extended instructions by 46.8%, find prime numbers by 80.9%, floating point math by 67.3%, integer math by 33.6%, physics by 67.5%, and random string sorting by 39.6%. These are the largest margins in the entire comparison.

AMD Ryzen 5 220, a single benchmark win. The AMD chip wins Cinebench R23 single-core with a score of 2188 versus 2071.5, a 5.6% advantage. This is the only head-to-head test where AMD leads. It suggests the Zen 4 architecture has a specific strength in that particular rendering workload, but the result does not extend to other single-thread tests.

AMD holds a small efficiency edge. TDP is 28 W for AMD versus 25 W for Intel, meaning AMD actually draws slightly more power, so the efficiency edge goes to Intel. The AMD chip does use a smaller socket package, but the database records no performance advantage from this. For users focused purely on the recorded metrics, Intel wins every category except one.