AMD Ryzen 5 5600X vs Intel Core i9-11900H Comparison

The Intel Core i9-11900H and AMD Ryzen 5 5600X present a fascinating contrast in CPU design philosophy, pitting a mobile flagship with eight cores against a desktop mid-range champion with six. The benchmark data reveals a split decision: the Intel chip secures 9 wins, while the AMD processor takes 12, yet the margins in each direction tell a more nuanced story than the raw win count suggests. With both CPUs sitting at the 75th percentile among all processors, the average benchmark scores are close—21,367 for Intel versus 21,771 for AMD—but the specific workloads where each dominates point to very different use cases.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-11900H establishes its advantage in heavily threaded, high-throughput scenarios that leverage its additional cores and threads. The most striking example is Cinebench R23 multi-core, where Intel scores 16,772 against AMD’s 11,838—a commanding 41.7% lead. This pattern repeats in 3DMark’s max-thread test, where Intel’s 6,109 outpaces AMD’s 5,588 by 9.3%, and in the 16-thread test with a 6072-to-5582 advantage (8.8%). Floating-point math also favors Intel, with a 43,094 score versus 39,487 (9.1% ahead), suggesting strength in scientific and engineering computations that rely on FPU throughput.

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600X, conversely, wins in single-threaded and lightly threaded workloads, as well as in several specific algorithmic tasks. Its PassMark single-thread score of 3,364 beats Intel’s 3,102 by 7.8%, and the 3DMark 2-thread test shows AMD ahead at 1,793 versus 1,708 (4.7% lead). The gap widens in 3DMark 4-thread, where AMD’s 3,363 versus Intel’s 3,104 represents a 7.7% advantage. Notably, AMD excels in prime number finding (134 vs 87, a 35.1% lead), data encryption (15,685 vs 12,232, a 22% lead), and physics calculations (1,316 vs 953, a 27.6% lead). The Ryzen also wins PassMark’s overall multithread score (21,858 vs 20,162, a 7.8% lead) despite having fewer cores, indicating superior per-core efficiency in mixed workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in single-threaded performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 5600X holds the edge in most single-thread metrics. Its PassMark single-thread score is 3,364 versus Intel’s 3,102 (7.8% faster), and in Cinebench R15 single-core, AMD scores 254 against Intel’s 238 (6.3% faster). The 3DMark single-thread test is a tie at 917 for both.

Q: Does the Intel i9-11900H’s extra cores guarantee a win in multi-core tests?

A: Not always. While Intel wins Cinebench R23 multi-core by 41.7% (16,772 vs 11,838) and 3DMark max-thread by 9.3%, AMD wins PassMark multithread by 7.8% (21,858 vs 20,162) and Cinebench R15 multi-core by 14.1% (1,968 vs 1,690). The outcome depends on the specific benchmark’s scaling behavior.

Q: How do the two compare in memory-related tasks?

A: In data compression, AMD leads with 252,306 versus 239,366 (a 5.1% advantage). For random string sorting, Intel wins 28,328 to 26,256 (a 7.9% lead). Both support DDR4 memory with dual-channel buses and identical 51.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What about encryption and security workloads?

A: AMD dominates here. The Ryzen 5 5600X scores 15,685 in PassMark data encryption versus Intel’s 12,232, a 22% margin. AMD also supports ECC memory, while Intel does not.

Q: Are these CPUs in the same performance tier overall?

A: Yes. Both sit at the 75th percentile of all CPUs, and their average benchmark scores differ by only 1.9% (21,771 for AMD versus 21,367 for Intel). Their nearest rivals overlap in the same performance bracket, with both comparing closely to processors like the Intel Core Ultra 7 155U and AMD Ryzen 7 4800H.

Q: Which CPU has better integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Core i9-11900H includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 750). The AMD Ryzen 5 5600X has no integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU for display output.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic divergence appears in Cinebench R23, where the two CPUs trade blows with opposite outcomes. Intel wins multi-core by 41.7% (16,772 vs 11,838) but loses single-core by a massive 53.6% margin in the other direction—wait, the data shows Intel wins single-core with 2,367 versus 1,541. This is a curious inversion: Intel leads single-core in R23 but trails in R15 (238 vs 254, a 6.3% deficit). The R23 results suggest the Intel chip’s boost behavior under sustained load is exceptional, while the R15 numbers indicate AMD’s lighter-thread efficiency.

In 3DMark, the pattern is clearer. Intel wins the 8-thread test (5,001 vs 4,811, 3.9% ahead), the 16-thread test (6,072 vs 5,582, 8.8% ahead), and max-thread (6,109 vs 5,588, 9.3% ahead). AMD wins 2-thread (1,793 vs 1,708, 4.7% ahead) and 4-thread (3,363 vs 3,104, 7.7% ahead). The single-thread test is dead even at 917. This suggests AMD’s core architecture has higher per-core throughput at lower thread counts, but Intel’s additional cores take over as parallelism increases.

PassMark reveals the most split results. AMD wins data encryption by 22% (15,685 vs 12,232), find prime numbers by 35.1% (134 vs 87), physics by 27.6% (1,316 vs 953), multithread by 7.8% (21,858 vs 20,162), and single-thread by 7.8% (3,364 vs 3,102). Intel wins floating-point math by 9.1% (43,094 vs 39,487), integer math by 2.4% (72,882 vs 71,161), and random string sorting by 7.9% (28,328 vs 26,256). The pattern is striking: AMD excels at branch-heavy, latency-sensitive tasks (primes, encryption, physics), while Intel dominates raw throughput tasks (FP math, integer math, sorting).

Specification Differences

The core configuration is the primary differentiator: Intel packs 8 cores and 16 threads, while AMD offers 6 cores and 12 threads. Clock speeds favor AMD on paper, with a 3.70 GHz base clock versus Intel’s 2.10 GHz, though Intel’s 4.90 GHz boost clock exceeds AMD’s 4.60 GHz. Thermal design power differs significantly: Intel is rated at 35W (mobile-class) versus AMD’s 65W (desktop-class). The sockets are incompatible (Intel BGA 1787 versus AMD Socket AM4), and Intel uses a 10nm process from its own foundry while AMD uses TSMC’s 7nm node. Intel’s die is larger at 190 mm² versus AMD’s 74 mm², and AMD packs 4,150 million transistors compared to Intel’s unspecified count.

Cache hierarchies diverge substantially. Intel allocates 80 KB L1 and 1.25 MB L2 per core, with 24 MB shared L3. AMD uses 64 KB L1 and 512 KB L2 per core, but a larger 32 MB L3 pool. Both support DDR4 dual-channel memory at 51.2 GB/s, but AMD adds ECC support. PCIe capabilities match at Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes. Intel includes UHD Graphics 750 integrated graphics; AMD has none. Intel’s multiplier is locked; AMD’s is unlocked. The market segments differ—Intel targets mobile, AMD targets desktop—and production statuses reflect this: Intel is end-of-life, AMD is active.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is generational and philosophical. Intel’s Tiger Lake-H represents a 10nm process built in-house, optimized for mobile efficiency with a 35W TDP. The design prioritizes high boost clocks (4.90 GHz) and a larger per-core L2 cache (1.25 MB) to compensate for lower base frequencies. AMD’s Zen 3 (Vermeer) uses TSMC’s 7nm node, featuring a smaller 74 mm² die with 4,150 million transistors—a denser, more power-efficient layout for desktop use. The 65W TDP allows sustained high clocks across fewer cores.

Cache strategy illustrates different priorities. Intel’s 24 MB shared L3 is smaller than AMD’s 32 MB, but Intel’s larger per-core L2 (1.25 MB vs 512 KB) suggests a focus on fast access for individual threads. AMD’s larger L3 benefits workloads that share data across cores, explaining its strong performance in multi-threaded PassMark tests despite fewer physical cores. The 3DMark 4-thread result (AMD 3,363 vs Intel 3,104) hints that Zen 3’s core design extracts more instructions per clock at moderate thread counts.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split by workload and platform. For users running heavily parallel, sustained workloads—particularly rendering (Cinebench R23 multi-core), floating-point math, and integer-heavy sorting—the Intel Core i9-11900H offers decisive advantages, with leads ranging from 2.4% to 41.7%. Its 8-core, 16-thread configuration and 4.90 GHz boost clock make it the choice for computational throughput, especially in mobile form factors where its 35W TDP is a practical benefit. The integrated UHD Graphics 750 adds flexibility for systems without discrete GPUs.

For users prioritizing single-thread responsiveness, cryptographic workloads, physics simulation, and overall mixed-use efficiency, the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X is the stronger pick. Its wins in single-thread (7.8%), encryption (22%), and prime number finding (35.1%) indicate superior per-core performance and algorithmic efficiency. The unlocked multiplier and ECC support also appeal to enthusiasts and professionals requiring those features. Despite having fewer cores, AMD’s PassMark multithread win (7.8%) proves that core count is not the sole determinant of multi-threaded performance.

The final choice hinges on platform and workload. The Intel chip is a mobile processor (BGA 1787) at end-of-life, suited for laptops needing raw multi-core power. The AMD chip is an active desktop processor (AM4) with overclocking headroom, ideal for users who value single-thread speed and efficiency across diverse tasks. The near-identical average benchmark scores (21,367 vs 21,771) and shared 75th percentile ranking mean neither is universally superior—the data simply points each to its respective domain.