AMD Ryzen 5 5605G vs Intel Core Ultra 5 338H Comparison

The Verdict

The data in the database presents a clear split between these two processors. The AMD Ryzen 5 5605G is a desktop part aimed at systems where a 65-watt socketed processor with an unlocked multiplier is the right fit. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H is a mobile processor, built for compact machines where power draw is a primary constraint.

For a desktop user who wants a socketed AM4 chip, the Ryzen 5 5605G is the only one of these two that can be installed on that platform. It offers a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, six cores, and twelve threads. The Intel part, with its 25-watt TDP, is designed for laptops and other mobile chassis, using the BGA 2540 socket, which means it is not intended for user upgrades.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H holds a significant performance advantage in the benchmark data. Its average benchmark score of 33989 places it in the 84th percentile of all CPUs, while the AMD part sits at the 50th percentile. The Intel chip scores 16331 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2044 in single-core. The AMD Ryzen 5 5605G has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, so its performance cannot be quantified here; all comparative statements rely on the Intel chip’s recorded results and its position relative to its nearest rivals.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H is the choice for anyone building or buying a mobile system where performance per watt is the priority. The Ryzen 5 5605G is the choice for a desktop builder with an AM4 motherboard who wants a six-core Zen 3 part with an unlocked multiplier and a 65-watt TDP. The Intel chip’s data shows it is a high-performing mobile processor, while the AMD chip’s role is defined by its platform fit and desktop features.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split between these two parts is substantial. The AMD Ryzen 5 5605G uses Zen 3 architecture on a 7 nm process from TSMC. Its codename is Cezanne, and it belongs to the 5000 series. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H uses Panther Lake architecture on a 3 nm process from Intel’s own foundry. This process node difference is notable: the Intel part is built on a newer node, which typically allows for higher efficiency, though the database does not provide direct efficiency metrics.

Core counts differ. The AMD part has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel part has 12 cores and 12 threads. This is an unusual configuration for Intel, as the thread count equals the core count. The database does not specify whether the Intel cores are performance or efficiency cores, but the recorded thread count is 12. The AMD part’s cache layout is 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of L3. The Intel part has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The AMD chip uses Radeon Vega 7, while the Intel chip uses Arc B370. The database does not provide benchmark scores for either iGPU, so no comparative performance statements can be made. The AMD part supports DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus and 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part supports LPDDR5X with a dual-channel bus and 136.5 GB/s bandwidth. That memory bandwidth figure is significantly higher for the Intel part.

PCIe support is another clear divergence. The AMD chip uses PCIe Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes. The Intel chip uses PCIe Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes. This difference matters for expansion: the AMD part offers more lanes but an older standard, while the Intel part offers the newest standard but far fewer lanes. The Intel part is also unlocked in terms of multiplier, though it is a mobile BGA chip, so overclocking is not a practical consideration for most users. The AMD part has an unlocked multiplier, which is relevant for desktop overclockers on the AM4 platform.

One more architectural detail: the AMD part has a transistor count of 10,700 million and a die size of 180 mm². The Intel part’s transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database. The AMD part is manufactured by TSMC, the Intel part by Intel. Both parts have ECC memory support marked as false.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has 12 cores, while the AMD Ryzen 5 5605G has 6 cores. Both parts have 12 threads.

Q: What is the difference in base clock speeds?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 5605G has a base clock of 3.90 GHz, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has a base clock of 1.90 GHz. The boost clocks are 4.40 GHz for the AMD part and 4.70 GHz for the Intel part.

Q: Which processor is designed for a desktop socket?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 5605G uses the AMD Socket AM4. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H uses Intel BGA 2540, which is a soldered mobile socket.

Q: What is the Intel part’s average benchmark score and percentile?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has an average benchmark score of 33989 and sits in the 84th percentile of all CPUs. The AMD Ryzen 5 5605G has a percentile of 50 and an average benchmark score of 0, with no recorded benchmarks.

Q: How does the Intel part compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H is 0.3% behind the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H, 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core i7-12800HX, 0.4% ahead of the Intel Xeon 6353P, and 0.7% behind the AMD EPYC 4244P.

Q: What memory types do the two processors support?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 5605G supports DDR4 memory. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H supports LPDDR5X memory. Both use a dual-channel memory bus.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the AMD Ryzen 5 5605G and the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H, based strictly on the database:

• Cores: 6 (AMD) vs 12 (Intel)
• Threads: 12 (AMD) vs 12 (Intel)
• Base Clock: 3.90 GHz (AMD) vs 1.90 GHz (Intel)
• Boost Clock: 4.40 GHz (AMD) vs 4.70 GHz (Intel)
• TDP: 65 (AMD) vs 25 (Intel)
• Socket: AMD Socket AM4 (AMD) vs Intel BGA 2540 (Intel)
• Architecture: Zen 3 (AMD) vs Panther Lake (Intel)
• Codename: Cezanne (AMD) vs Panther Lake (Intel)
• Generation: Ryzen 5 (Zen 3 (Cezanne)) (AMD) vs Ultra 5 (Panther Lake-H) (Intel)
• Process Node: 7 nm (AMD) vs 3 nm (Intel)
• Foundry: TSMC (AMD) vs Intel (Intel)
• Transistors: 10,700 million (AMD) vs null (Intel)
• Die Size: 180 mm² (AMD) vs null (Intel)
• L1 Cache: 64 KB per core (AMD) vs 192 KB per core (Intel)
• L2 Cache: 512 KB per core (AMD) vs 2.5 MB per core (Intel)
• L3 Cache: 16 MB (AMD) vs 18 MB shared (Intel)
• Memory Support: DDR4 (AMD) vs LPDDR5X (Intel)
• Memory Bandwidth: 51.2 GB/s (AMD) vs 136.5 GB/s (Intel)
• PCIe: Gen 3, 16 Lanes (AMD) vs Gen 5, 4 Lanes (Intel)
• Integrated Graphics: Radeon Vega 7 (AMD) vs Arc B370 (Intel)
• Market Segment: Desktop (AMD) vs Mobile (Intel)
• Release Date: 2025-02-23 (AMD) vs 2026-01-04 (Intel)
• Multiplier Unlocked: true (AMD) vs false (Intel)

Both parts have ECC memory support marked as false and neither has a recorded launch MSRP in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database does not contain head-to-head benchmark results between these two processors. The AMD Ryzen 5 5605G has no benchmark scores recorded at all. Its average benchmark score is 0, and its percentile is 50. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has an extensive set of recorded scores, which are listed in the database.

The Intel part’s Cinebench scores are as follows: R15 multi-core 2504, R15 single-core 305, R20 multi-core 10213, R20 single-core 1441, R23 multi-core 16331, and R23 single-core 2044. These scores provide a quantitative baseline for the Intel chip’s performance across different rendering workloads.

In PassMark tests, the Intel part shows a wide spread. It scores 276539 in data compression, 21367 in data encryption, 23906 in extended instructions, 304 in find prime numbers, 84067 in floating point math, 64934 in integer math, 28717 in multithread, 2697 in physics, 34082 in random string sorting, and 4180 in single-thread. The single-thread score appears twice in the database, once as 4180 and once as 4180, which is consistent.

Because the AMD part has no recorded scores, the database cannot provide a direct head-to-head comparison. Any statement about which chip wins a specific test is impossible to make from the data. The Intel chip’s benchmark suite is comprehensive, but there is no counterpart for the AMD chip.

The Intel part’s nearest rivals provide context for its performance. It sits 0.3% behind the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H, 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core i7-12800HX, 0.4% ahead of the Intel Xeon 6353P, and 0.7% behind the AMD EPYC 4244P. These deltas are all within one percent, indicating that the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H performs on par with a set of well-known CPUs across a range of market segments.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the available data, the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H wins in every measurable benchmark category, simply because the AMD Ryzen 5 5605G has no recorded benchmark scores. The Intel part’s average score of 33989 and its 84th percentile ranking confirm it is a strong performer among all CPUs. Its nearest rival comparison shows it is effectively tied with the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H, the Intel Core i7-12800HX, the Intel Xeon 6353P, and the AMD EPYC 4244P.

The AMD Ryzen 5 5605G wins on platform flexibility for desktop users. It uses the AM4 socket, which is a socketed platform, and it has an unlocked multiplier. This makes it the only one of the two that can be installed in a user-serviceable desktop motherboard. Its 65-watt TDP is higher than the Intel part’s 25-watt TDP, but it is a desktop processor, so that is expected. The AMD part also offers 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, which is more than the Intel part’s 4 PCIe Gen 5 lanes. For systems needing multiple expansion cards, the AMD part provides more physical lanes.

The Intel part wins for mobile use cases. Its 25-watt TDP and BGA 2540 socket are designed for laptops. Its memory bandwidth of 136.5 GB/s is more than double the AMD part’s 51.2 GB/s, which is a clear advantage for memory-intensive workloads. Its PCIe Gen 5 support, while limited to 4 lanes, offers the newest standard for high-speed devices. The Intel part also has a higher boost clock at 4.70 GHz compared to the AMD part’s 4.40 GHz, and it carries more L3 cache at 18 MB shared versus 16 MB.

The Intel chip’s 12 cores give it a raw core-count advantage over the AMD chip’s 6 cores. Both have 12 threads, but the Intel part has twice the physical cores. The newer 3 nm process node for Intel suggests a more modern design, though the database does not provide efficiency metrics to confirm this.

For a desktop builder with an existing AM4 board, the AMD Ryzen 5 5605G is the only option here. For a mobile system designer or buyer, the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H is the only option here. The performance data, where it exists, belongs entirely to the Intel part. The AMD part’s role is defined by its desktop socket, unlocked multiplier, and DDR4 support. Neither part can substitute for the other in their respective platforms.