AMD Ryzen 5 240 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus records an average benchmark score of 66855, while the AMD Ryzen 5 240 records 33542. The Intel part sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, compared to the AMD part's 84th percentile.

Q: How do the two compare in single-core Cinebench R23 performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 2261 in Cinebench R23 single-core, which is 23% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 240's 1742. The same pattern appears in PassMark single-thread testing, where Intel leads 4757 versus 3675, a 22.7% advantage.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two processors?

A: The largest delta appears in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 486 against the AMD Ryzen 5 240's 70, a 85.6% difference. The second largest gap is in floating point math, where Intel leads by 72.2% with 162692 versus 45301.

Q: Do both processors support DDR5 memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen 5 240 and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus support DDR5 memory with dual-channel memory buses. However, the Intel part's memory bandwidth is 115.2 GB/s, while the AMD part's is 89.6 GB/s.

Q: Are both processors currently in production?

A: Yes, both processors have an active production status. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 was released on 2025-01-05, and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus was released on 2026-03-10.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory and PCIe Gen 5?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus supports ECC memory and provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 does not support ECC memory and provides PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes.

The Verdict

The recorded data delivers a clear verdict: the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus wins every single head-to-head benchmark in the database. Across 15 comparisons, Intel takes all 15, with deltas ranging from a modest 17.7% in Cinebench R15 single-core to a dominant 85.6% in PassMark find prime numbers. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 does not record a single win.

For users selecting between these two, the decision depends on platform and workload context rather than raw performance. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is a desktop processor with an unlocked multiplier, 18 cores, a 125 TDP, and a 5.30 boost clock. It also carries a launch MSRP of $199. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 is a mobile processor with 6 cores, a 45 TDP, and a 5.00 boost clock. It is designed for a different form factor, using AMD Socket FP8, while the Intel part uses Intel Socket 1851.

The Intel part's percentile placement at 93 versus the AMD part's 84 reinforces the performance gap. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus also sits among much stronger rivals in the database, with its nearest competitor, the AMD EPYC 4465P, at a delta of -0.1%, and the Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX at -0.9%. The AMD Ryzen 5 240's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H at 0% delta and the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS at -0.4%, a much lower performance tier.

The data indicates that the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is the choice for anyone who can accommodate a desktop socket and a 125 TDP. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 remains relevant only in contexts where its 45 TDP and mobile socket are required, since its benchmark results trail Intel in every measured category.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus demonstrates its largest advantages in compute-heavy workloads. In Cinebench R23 multicore, Intel scores 30867 against AMD's 13013, a 57.8% lead. The Cinebench R15 multicore test shows a similar pattern, with Intel at 4640 and AMD at 2078, a 55.2% difference. These results reflect the core count disparity: Intel fields 18 cores and 18 threads, while AMD fields 6 cores and 12 threads.

The PassMark suite reinforces the multicore story. In PassMark multithread, Intel scores 51596 versus AMD's 22658, a 56.1% lead. PassMark physics shows Intel at 3494 against AMD's 1060, a 69.7% gap. PassMark floating point math delivers Intel 162692 versus AMD's 45301, a 72.2% advantage. PassMark find prime numbers produces the widest margin, with Intel at 486 and AMD at 70, an 85.6% difference.

Single-core performance also favors Intel, though by smaller margins. In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 2261 versus AMD's 1742, a 23% lead. Cinebench R15 single-core shows Intel at 328 and AMD at 270, a 17.7% advantage. PassMark single-thread records Intel at 4757 and AMD at 3675, a 22.7% lead.

Data compression and encryption workloads follow the same direction. PassMark data compression has Intel at 568721 and AMD at 267963, a 52.9% lead. PassMark data encryption shows Intel at 42144 and AMD at 15849, a 62.4% advantage. PassMark extended instructions records Intel at 44565 and AMD at 20201, a 54.7% gap. PassMark integer math has Intel at 125091 and AMD at 73189, a 41.5% lead. PassMark random string sorting shows Intel at 69090 and AMD at 32385, a 53.1% advantage.

The smallest recorded delta is the 17.7% in Cinebench R15 single-core, which indicates that the AMD part's single-core performance is relatively closer to Intel's than its multicore output. Still, the database contains no test where the AMD Ryzen 5 240 surpasses the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification field. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 uses 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus uses 18 cores and 18 threads. The AMD part has a base clock of 4.30 and a boost clock of 5.00. The Intel part has a base clock of 4.20 and a boost clock of 5.30.

TDP differs substantially: the AMD Ryzen 5 240 is rated at 45, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is rated at 125. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP8, and the Intel part uses Intel Socket 1851. The AMD multiplier is locked, while the Intel multiplier is unlocked.

Memory bandwidth favors Intel at 115.2 GB/s versus AMD's 89.6 GB/s, though both use dual-channel DDR5. ECC memory support is present on the Intel part but absent on the AMD part. PCIe capability also differs: AMD provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes, while Intel provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 uses a Radeon 760M, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus uses an Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The AMD part carries the part number 100-000001727, and the Intel part carries SA4UZ. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $199; the AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 5 240 is built on the Zen 4 architecture with the codename Hawk Point, using a 4 nm process from TSMC. It contains 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is built on the Arrow Lake Refresh codename within the Core Ultra Series 2, using a 3 nm process from TSMC. It contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die.

Cache configurations differ significantly. The AMD part provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The Intel part provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3. The Intel part's larger L2 and L3 caches align with its higher core count and desktop positioning.

The AMD Ryzen 5 240 belongs to the Ryzen 5 generation with the Zen 4 (Hawk Point) designation, and its market segment is mobile. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus belongs to the Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake) generation, and its market segment is desktop. The process node difference, 4 nm versus 3 nm, gives the Intel part a manufacturing advantage, while the transistor count favors AMD by 25,000 million versus 17,800 million.

The Intel part's ECC memory support and PCIe Gen 5 connectivity position it for desktop workstation and enthusiast builds. The AMD part's 45 TDP and mobile socket position it for laptops and compact systems. Neither processor has a vCache 3D option recorded in the database, and neither lists a total L3 value beyond the shared cache figures.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus wins in every benchmark category recorded in the database, so the use-case split is defined by workload type and platform constraints rather than any AMD advantage.

For multicore rendering and content creation, the Intel part is the clear choice. Cinebench R23 multicore shows a 57.8% lead, and Cinebench R15 multicore shows a 55.2% lead. The 18-core configuration delivers 30867 in Cinebench R23 multicore, which places it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. The AMD part's 13013 score places it in the 84th percentile.

For single-core responsiveness, the Intel part also leads, though by a smaller margin. Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 23% advantage, and PassMark single-thread shows a 22.7% advantage. Applications that depend on per-thread performance will still favor Intel, but the delta is less extreme.

For data-heavy workloads such as compression and encryption, Intel dominates. PassMark data compression shows a 52.9% lead, and PassMark data encryption shows a 62.4% lead. The Intel part's 568721 compression score and 42144 encryption score are roughly double the AMD part's output.

For floating-point and integer math, the Intel part's advantage ranges from 41.5% in integer math to 72.2% in floating point math. The find prime numbers test shows the most extreme gap at 85.6%, indicating a substantial advantage in workloads that stress repeated prime computation.

The AMD Ryzen 5 240 does not win any benchmark category. Its only practical advantage is its 45 TDP and mobile socket, which make it suitable for systems where the Intel part's 125 TDP and desktop socket cannot be accommodated. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus, with its unlocked multiplier, 5.30 boost clock, ECC support, and PCIe Gen 5, is the superior processor in every measured performance metric.