AMD Ryzen 5 40 vs Intel Core Ultra X7 368H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a complete sweep for the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H across all 15 shared benchmark tests. The AMD Ryzen 5 40 does not win a single head-to-head comparison. The largest margin appears in PassMark find prime numbers, where Intel leads by 93.8%, scoring 321 versus 20. Floating point math shows an 85.6% gap, with Intel at 105681 against AMD's 15194. Cinebench R23 multi-core delivers Intel's biggest win among rendering tests: 28221 versus 4841, a delta of 82.8%.

Single-thread performance favors Intel by a smaller but still decisive margin. Cinebench R23 single-core records 3984 for Intel versus 1150 for AMD, a 71.1% difference. PassMark single thread shows 4005 against 2477, a 38.2% gap, the narrowest of any test in the set. Cinebench R15 single-core follows the same pattern, with Intel at 401 and AMD at 165.5, a 58.7% delta.

Multi-threaded workloads amplify the difference. PassMark multithread puts Intel at 32956 versus AMD's 9341, a 71.7% delta. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 2844 against 790, a 72.2% gap. Data compression scores 312927 for Intel versus 141533 for AMD, a 54.8% delta. Data encryption follows with 25228 versus 6646, a 73.7% gap. Extended instructions show 25669 against 6437, a 74.9% delta. Integer math records 88083 versus 31598, a 64.1% gap. Random string sorting shows 38093 against 15124, a 60.3% delta. Physics simulation scores 2857 versus 432, an 84.9% gap.

The average benchmark score places Intel at 40518, roughly 2.55 times AMD's 15882. Percentile ranking against all CPUs in the database reinforces that separation: Intel sits at the 87th percentile, AMD at the 70th.

Where Each One Wins

The dataset contains no benchmark where the AMD Ryzen 5 40 finishes ahead. Every rendering test, every PassMark workload, and every single-thread measurement belongs to the Intel part. The only practical interpretation is workload breadth: Intel wins across CPU-bound tasks of all types, including integer math, floating point math, encryption, compression, physics, and rendering.

AMD's position is defined by relative proximity rather than victory. Its best showing relative to Intel comes in PassMark single thread, where the 38.2% delta is the smallest of the set. That suggests the Ryzen 5 40's single-core efficiency is its least disadvantaged area, though still clearly behind. In contrast, the largest deltas, such as the 93.8% gap in prime number finding and the 85.6% gap in floating point math, indicate workloads that amplify the architectural gap between the two.

For multi-threaded productivity, the Cinebench R23 multi-core result is the clearest signal. Intel's 28221 versus AMD's 4841 means the Ultra X7 368H delivers roughly 5.8 times the multi-core render score. The PassMark multithread score shows a 3.5 times advantage. These are not marginal differences; they represent different performance tiers entirely.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use fundamentally different designs. The AMD Ryzen 5 40 is built on Zen 2 architecture under the Mendocino codename, produced on TSMC's 6 nm process. It has 4 cores and 8 threads, with base and boost clocks of 2.80 GHz and 4.30 GHz respectively. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H uses Panther Lake architecture, codename Panther Lake, on Intel's 3 nm process. It has 16 cores and 16 threads, with a 2.00 GHz base clock and a 5.00 GHz boost clock. The core count difference is 4x, but the thread count difference is only 2x, because Intel's part does not use simultaneous multithreading.

Cache configurations differ sharply. AMD allocates 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of shared L3. Intel allocates 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The larger per-core caches and the 4.5x larger L3 pool give Intel a substantial on-die memory advantage.

Memory support also diverges. AMD uses LPDDR5 with dual-channel bus and 88.0 GB/s bandwidth. Intel uses LPDDR5X with dual-channel bus and 153.6 GB/s bandwidth, a 74.5% increase in theoretical memory bandwidth. PCIe connectivity differs as well: AMD offers Gen 3 with 4 lanes (CPU only), while Intel offers Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only).

The integrated graphics are different tiers. AMD pairs the CPU with Radeon 610M. Intel pairs it with Arc B390. The database records no graphics benchmarks for either, so no performance comparison is possible from this data.

Other differences include socket type (AMD Socket FT6 versus Intel BGA 2540), TDP (15 W versus 25 W), and release date. AMD's release date is September 30, 2025, while Intel's is January 4, 2026. Both parts are currently active in production, both lack an unlocked multiplier, and neither supports ECC memory.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The AMD Ryzen 5 40 has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H boosts to 5.00 GHz. The AMD Ryzen 5 40 boosts to 4.30 GHz. Intel also has a lower base clock at 2.00 GHz compared to AMD's 2.80 GHz.

Q: How much faster is Intel in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: Intel scores 28221 versus AMD's 4841, a delta of 82.8% in Intel's favor.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: Intel supports LPDDR5X with 153.6 GB/s. AMD supports LPDDR5 with 88.0 GB/s. Intel's theoretical bandwidth is 74.5% higher.

Q: Which processor uses a smaller manufacturing process?

A: Intel uses a 3 nm process. AMD uses a 6 nm process. Intel's process is smaller, and it is fabricated by Intel, while AMD's is fabricated by TSMC.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. Both the AMD Ryzen 5 40 and the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H have ECC support listed as false.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H wins every recorded test, with deltas ranging from 38.2% to 93.8%. The 87th percentile ranking versus 70th percentile confirms that Intel sits in a higher overall performance class. The AMD Ryzen 5 40's only redeeming data point is its lower 15 W TDP versus Intel's 25 W, which suggests lower power draw in constrained chassis, though the database records no efficiency benchmarks to quantify that tradeoff.

For workloads that rely on multi-threaded rendering, the Cinebench R23 multi-core result alone settles the matter. For single-thread responsiveness, the 38.2% PassMark single-thread delta is the closest margin but still firmly favors Intel. The architecture differences, including 16 cores versus 4, 18 MB versus 4 MB of L3 cache, and 153.6 GB/s versus 88.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, all align with the measured performance gap.

The AMD Ryzen 5 40 is best understood as a low-power mobile part with modest compute capability. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is a higher-power mobile part with substantially more cores, more cache, and higher memory bandwidth. The data does not support any scenario where the Ryzen 5 40 outperforms the Ultra X7 368H in the tested workloads.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 40 | Intel Core Ultra X7 368H |

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

| Cores | 4 | 16 |

| Threads | 8 | 16 |

| Base clock | 2.80 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.30 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 25 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FT6 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Architecture | Zen 2 | Panther Lake |

| Codename | Mendocino | Panther Lake |

| Process node | 6 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

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

| L3 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | LPDDR5 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory bandwidth | 88.0 GB/s | 153.6 GB/s |

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

| Integrated graphics | Radeon 610M | Arc B390 |

| Release date | September 30, 2025 | January 4, 2026 |

| Part number | unknown | SA4R7Q9EJ |