AMD Ryzen 5 240 vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents a thoroughly one-sided comparison. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 wins all 15 head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the AMD Ryzen 5 240, with the smallest margin being a 24.7% lead in the PassMark single-thread tests. The largest gaps appear in heavily multithreaded workloads, where the Intel part's core-count advantage becomes decisive.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 scores 48,945 against the AMD Ryzen 5 240's 13,013, a delta of 73.4%. The single-core R23 result shows a similar proportional gap: 6,909 versus 1,742, a 74.8% difference. The older Cinebench R15 test confirms the pattern, with Intel leading 4,933 to 2,078 in multi-core (57.9% ahead) and 696 to 270 in single-core (61.2% ahead).

PassMark workloads reinforce the same hierarchy. The Intel part delivers 602,121 in data compression versus 267,963, a 55.5% lead. Data encryption shows a 66.2% gap (46,949 versus 15,849). Extended instructions scores are 45,357 against 20,201, another 55.5% margin. The prime number search workload is the most lopsided: 459 versus 70, an 84.7% deficit for the AMD chip. Floating point math shows 194,988 versus 45,301, a 76.8% gap, and integer math lands at 164,869 versus 73,189, a 55.6% margin. The PassMark multi-thread score is 56,602 versus 22,658, a 60% difference, while the physics test shows 3,598 versus 1,060, a 70.5% gap. Random string sorting rounds out the list at 73,651 versus 32,385, a 56% lead for Intel.

The only category where the AMD Ryzen 5 240 comes close is single-thread performance. The PassMark single-thread score of 3,675 versus 4,881 represents the narrowest relative gap in the entire dataset at 24.7%. Even so, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 still wins that test outright.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data shows no recorded workload where the AMD Ryzen 5 240 takes the lead. Every single test in the head-to-head set, from Cinebench rendering to PassMark math and encryption workloads, favors the Intel Core Ultra 9 285. That includes both single-threaded and multithreaded tests.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 therefore claims the win in every measurable category recorded in the database. Its most dominant areas are prime number computation, where it holds an 84.7% advantage, followed by floating point math at 76.8%, Cinebench R23 multi-core at 73.4%, and physics at 70.5%. These are compute-heavy workloads that scale with core count and raw throughput.

The AMD Ryzen 5 240's closest relative performance appears in the PassMark single-thread test, where the gap narrows to 24.7%. That still leaves the AMD part behind, but it suggests the Zen 4 architecture's single-core efficiency keeps the deficit smaller than in heavily parallel tasks. The Ryzen 5 240 also shows its smallest Cinebench gap in R15 single-core at 61.2%, still a substantial margin but less severe than the 74.8% seen in R23 single-core.

For users whose workloads resemble the recorded tests, the data points entirely toward the Intel part. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 does not win a single benchmark in this comparison, so there is no category in the database where it can be recommended based on measured performance.

The Verdict

The recorded data leaves no ambiguity. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 outperforms the AMD Ryzen 5 240 in every benchmark test included in the comparison, with margins ranging from 24.7% to 84.7%. The Intel part's average benchmark score of 75,488 places it at the 95th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the AMD Ryzen 5 240's average of 33,542 sits at the 84th percentile.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 sits among rivals like the AMD EPYC 8224P, which scores 75,582, and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D at 75,716. Its closest competitor in the database is the AMD EPYC 4545P at 75,373, a 0.2% difference. The AMD Ryzen 5 240, by contrast, ranks near the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H at 33,537, the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS at 33,667, and the AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX at 33,668. The 84th percentile placement for the Ryzen 5 240 is respectable for a mobile chip, but the Intel part's 95th percentile placement reflects a much higher tier of absolute performance.

Any user selecting between these two parts based strictly on the database measurements would choose the Intel Core Ultra 9 285. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 offers no benchmark win in any recorded test, and the average score gap is more than double: 75,488 versus 33,542. The Intel part also carries a launch MSRP of $579, while the AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher Cinebench R23 multi-core score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 scores 48,945, while the AMD Ryzen 5 240 scores 13,013. Intel leads by 73.4%.

Q: How close is single-thread performance between the two?

A: The narrowest gap is in PassMark single-thread, where Intel scores 4,881 and AMD scores 3,675, a 24.7% difference. Cinebench R23 single-core shows a wider 74.8% gap (6,909 versus 1,742).

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has 24 cores and 24 threads. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What are the process nodes for each CPU?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 240 uses a 4 nm process from TSMC. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 uses a 3 nm process from TSMC.

Q: Do both CPUs support DDR5 memory?

A: Yes, both support DDR5. The Intel part has a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, while the AMD part has 89.6 GB/s. The Intel part also supports ECC memory; the AMD part does not.

Q: What is the market segment for each CPU?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 240 is a mobile processor on AMD Socket FP8. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 is a desktop processor on Intel Socket 1851.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 uses the Zen 4 architecture under the Hawk Point codename, built on a 4 nm TSMC process. It packs 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 4.30 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. Its TDP is 45 watts. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 uses the Arrow Lake architecture, specifically Arrow Lake-S, built on a 3 nm TSMC process. It offers 24 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz, at a 65 watt TDP.

Cache hierarchy differs substantially. 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 36 MB of shared L3. Transistor counts and die sizes also diverge: the AMD chip has 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, while the Intel chip has 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die.

Memory support is dual-channel DDR5 for both, but the Intel part has a higher recorded memory bandwidth at 102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s. The Intel part also supports ECC memory, which the AMD part does not. PCIe connectivity differs by generation: the AMD Ryzen 5 240 uses Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 uses Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only).

Integrated graphics also differ. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 carries a Radeon 760M. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 carries an Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The AMD part's part number is 100-000001727, and the Intel part's is SRQD4. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 was released on January 5, 2025, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has a release date of December 31, 2024. Both are listed as Active in production status.