AMD Ryzen 5 2600X vs Intel Core Ultra 9 288V Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive overall victory for the Intel Core Ultra 9 288V, which secures 10 wins across the 13 head-to-head tests, against 3 for the AMD Ryzen 5 2600X. The magnitude of those wins, however, varies dramatically by workload type, making this a more nuanced comparison than the raw win count suggests.

The most lopsided result in the entire dataset is the passmark_find_prime_numbers test, where the Intel part scores 195 against AMD's 38, a delta of 413.2%. This is an extraordinary gap that highlights a fundamental difference in how each processor handles this specific integer workload. Similarly, the passmark_floating_point_math test shows the Intel CPU at 59,536 versus 24,270 for AMD, a 145.3% advantage. The passmark_extended_instructions test tells a comparable story: Intel's 15,613 nearly doubles AMD's 7,581, a 105.9% delta.

Single-threaded performance is another area of clear Intel dominance. In cinebench_r15_singlecore, the Intel chip scores 301.5 against 163 for AMD, an 85% lead. The passmark_single_thread result mirrors this, with Intel at 4,274 and AMD at 2,381, a 79.5% delta. These single-thread results are consistent with the architecture differences discussed later and are substantial enough to matter in everyday responsiveness and lightly-threaded applications.

Multi-threaded performance also favors Intel, though by a smaller margin than the single-core results. In cinebench_r15_multicore, Intel scores 1,583 versus AMD's 1,341, an 18% lead. The passmark_multithread test shows a larger gap: 19,810 for Intel against 13,893 for AMD, a 42.6% delta. This is notable because AMD has 12 threads to Intel's 8, yet still loses by a significant margin in this aggregate measure.

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600X does secure three wins, and they are worth examining closely. The closest is passmark_random_string_sorting, where AMD edges out Intel by just 1.3% (22,911 vs 22,622). The other two wins are more substantial: passmark_data_compression shows AMD at 198,785 versus Intel's 186,521, a 6.2% advantage, and passmark_integer_math gives AMD the nod at 47,377 against 44,019, a 7.1% lead. These are meaningful, but they are isolated pockets of strength in workloads that do not define overall system performance.

The remaining head-to-head test, passmark_data_encryption, goes to Intel by 7.7% (14,141 vs 13,133). This is a moderate win for Intel in a security-related workload. The overall average benchmark score for Intel is 23,219, placing it at the 76th percentile of all CPUs, while AMD's average is 22,823, also at the 76th percentile. The Intel part's nearest rival is the Intel Core i9-11900F with an average score of 23,254 (a delta of -0.2%), while AMD's nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 5 7535U at 22,791 (a delta of 0.1%).

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different eras and design philosophies. The Intel Core Ultra 9 288V is built on the Lunar Lake architecture, a 3 nm process node fabricated by TSMC. It belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 and is marked as a mobile segment part. The AMD Ryzen 5 2600X, by contrast, uses the Zen architecture (specifically Zen+ Pinnacle Ridge) on a 12 nm node from GlobalFoundries and is a desktop segment part.

The core and thread counts differ significantly: Intel has 8 cores and 8 threads, while AMD has 6 cores and 12 threads. This means AMD relies on simultaneous multithreading to reach 12 threads while Intel does not use SMT at all. The cache hierarchy also diverges. Intel provides 192 KB of L1 cache per core and 2.5 MB of L2 per core, with 12 MB of shared L3 cache. AMD offers 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. So Intel has more per-core cache, while AMD has more total L3.

Clock speeds tell a contrasting story. AMD has a higher base clock at 3.60 GHz versus Intel's 3.30 GHz, but Intel has a substantially higher boost clock at 5.10 GHz versus AMD's 4.25 GHz. This boost advantage helps explain Intel's dominance in single-threaded tests. The power envelopes are also very different: Intel is rated at 30 W TDP while AMD is rated at 95 W TDP. This is a 3.17x difference in rated power, yet Intel still manages to outperform in most tests.

Memory support is another major differentiator. Intel uses LPDDR5X memory with a dual-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 136.5 GB/s. AMD uses DDR4 with a dual-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s. That is a 2.91x bandwidth advantage for Intel, which likely contributes to its performance in memory-sensitive workloads. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

The integrated graphics situation is stark. Intel includes an Arc 140V iGPU, while AMD has no integrated graphics at all, meaning a discrete GPU is mandatory for any display output on the AMD part. PCIe connectivity also differs: Intel offers Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only), while AMD offers Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The transistor count and die size are only listed for AMD: 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die. Intel's figures are not provided.

Where Each One Wins

Looking at the benchmark data, the Intel Core Ultra 9 288V is the clear choice for single-threaded and floating-point-heavy workloads. Its 85% lead in cinebench_r15_singlecore and 79.5% lead in passmark_single_thread make it particularly strong for applications that scale with per-core speed, such as everyday desktop responsiveness, web browsing, and lightly-threaded productivity tasks. The 145.3% advantage in passmark_floating_point_math and 105.9% lead in extended instructions point to strong performance in scientific computing, financial modeling, and other numerically-intensive applications. The 413.2% lead in prime number finding is an extreme outlier that suggests exceptional performance in certain algorithmic workloads.

The Intel part also wins in multi-threaded aggregate tests despite having fewer threads. The 42.6% lead in passmark_multithread and 18% lead in cinebench_r15_multicore indicate that even in heavily threaded scenarios, the architectural efficiency and higher boost clocks of Lunar Lake compensate for the thread count disadvantage. For encryption workloads, the 7.7% lead in passmark_data_encryption makes Intel the better pick for security-sensitive operations.

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600X, despite losing the overall comparison, has specific niches where it holds the advantage. The 6.2% win in passmark_data_compression suggests it handles compression and decompression tasks slightly better, which could matter for archiving, backup, and file transfer workloads. The 7.1% lead in passmark_integer_math indicates strength in integer-heavy calculations that are common in some video encoding and rendering pipelines. The 1.3% edge in random string sorting is marginal but consistent with these other integer-oriented wins.

For users who need to run with a discrete GPU regardless, the AMD part's lack of integrated graphics is not a disadvantage. Its 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes allow for standard GPU connectivity, while Intel's 4 Gen 5 lanes may require more careful configuration for high-bandwidth devices.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 288V has a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen 5 2600X has a boost clock of 4.25 GHz.

Q: How many threads does each processor support?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 288V supports 8 threads (8 cores, no SMT), while the AMD Ryzen 5 2600X supports 12 threads (6 cores with SMT).

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 2600X has 16 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 288V has 12 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 288V is rated at 30 W TDP, while the AMD Ryzen 5 2600X is rated at 95 W TDP.

Q: Does the AMD processor have integrated graphics?

A: No, the AMD Ryzen 5 2600X has no integrated graphics, whereas the Intel Core Ultra 9 288V includes an Arc 140V iGPU.

Q: Which processor won the passmark_find_prime_numbers test?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 288V won decisively with a score of 195 versus 38 for the AMD Ryzen 5 2600X, a 413.2% delta.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the Intel Core Ultra 9 288V is the superior processor in the vast majority of tested workloads. It wins 10 of the 13 head-to-head tests, often by very large margins, and its advantages are concentrated in the areas that matter most for general computing: single-threaded performance, floating-point math, and aggregate multi-threaded throughput. The 85% lead in single-core Cinebench and 42.6% lead in multithreaded PassMark are decisive. Additionally, Intel achieves these results at a 30 W TDP compared to AMD's 95 W TDP, making it dramatically more power-efficient. The inclusion of an integrated Arc 140V GPU eliminates the need for a discrete graphics card for basic use, which is a practical advantage for many systems.

The AMD Ryzen 5 2600X is not without merit, but its wins are narrower and confined to a few specific workload types. Its 6.2% advantage in data compression and 7.1% lead in integer math are real, but they do not compensate for the substantial deficits elsewhere. The AMD part's higher base clock of 3.60 GHz does not translate into competitive single-threaded performance, and its larger L3 cache of 16 MB does not overcome Intel's other architectural advantages. For users who specifically prioritize compression and integer-heavy tasks, the AMD part may be the better choice, but these are narrow use cases.

The verdict is clear: for a balanced assessment of performance across the benchmark suite, the Intel Core Ultra 9 288V is the stronger processor. Its wins are larger, more numerous, and more relevant to everyday and demanding workloads alike. The AMD Ryzen 5 2600X should only be selected by users who have a specific, data-backed need for its particular strengths in integer math and data compression, and who are willing to accept significant compromises in single-threaded performance, multi-threaded throughput, and power consumption.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core Ultra 9 288V | AMD Ryzen 5 2600X |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 8 | 6 |

| Threads | 8 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 3.30 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.10 GHz | 4.25 GHz |

| TDP | 30 W | 95 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 2833 | AMD Socket AM4 |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 12 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| L1 Cache | 192 KB (per core) | 96 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 2.5 MB (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 12 MB (shared) | 16 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | LPDDR5X | DDR4 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 136.5 GB/s | 46.9 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 4 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Arc 140V | None |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Transistors | Not provided | 4,800 million |

| Die Size | Not provided | 213 mm² |