AMD Ryzen 5 7530U vs Intel Core Ultra 5 228V Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive overall victory for the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V, which wins 13 of the 15 head-to-head comparisons against the AMD Ryzen 5 7530U. The most dramatic margin comes in the passmark_find_prime_numbers test, where Intel scores 168 points against AMD’s 47, a staggering 257.4% advantage. This is a workload that clearly benefits from the Intel architecture’s per-core efficiency, and the result is not an outlier in direction—it is merely the largest example of a consistent single-threaded dominance.

Single-core performance is the foundation of Intel’s lead. In cinebench_r23_singlecore, the Ultra 5 228V scores 1758 against the Ryzen’s 1441, a 22% delta. The passmark_single_thread test shows a similar story at 3836 versus 3049, a 25.8% improvement. The cinebench_r15_singlecore result reinforces this pattern with a 15.6% win (267 vs 231). These numbers indicate that for everyday responsiveness, lightly threaded applications, and any workload that scales poorly across cores, the Intel part holds a clear and measurable edge.

Multi-core performance also favors Intel, though by a smaller but still significant margin. The cinebench_r23_multicore test shows the Ultra 5 228V at 9932 versus 8361 for the Ryzen, an 18.8% lead. The passmark_multithread score of 18227 against 15534 represents a 17.3% advantage. Interestingly, the Intel chip achieves this despite having 8 cores and 8 threads, while the AMD part has 6 cores and 12 threads. The extra threads do not compensate for the per-core throughput advantage that Intel demonstrates across the Cinebench suite.

The specialized floating-point and physics workloads heavily favor Intel. In passmark_floating_point_math, Intel scores 53310 versus AMD’s 31063, a 71.6% delta. The passmark_physics test is even more lopsided at 1538 versus 670, a 129.6% lead. Extended instruction performance (passmark_extended_instructions) also goes to Intel by 20.7% (14801 vs 12264). Data encryption favors Intel by 10.2% (13032 vs 11826), and random string sorting shows a 9.1% margin (21254 vs 19477).

However, the AMD Ryzen 5 7530U does secure two notable wins, and they are in areas that matter for specific workloads. The passmark_integer_math test is a major victory for AMD, scoring 57609 against Intel’s 39679—a 31.1% advantage for the Ryzen. This is the largest delta in AMD’s favor across all tests, suggesting that pure integer arithmetic throughput is a strength of the Zen 3 architecture. The other win is in passmark_data_compression, where AMD scores 185860 against Intel’s 173924, a 6.4% lead. These two results prevent the comparison from being a complete shutout and highlight that the AMD chip retains competence in specific compute-heavy tasks.

Overall, the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V posts an avgBenchmarkScore of 21440, placing it in the 75th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rival by average score is the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 (21484, delta -0.2%), meaning the Ultra 5 228V is effectively at parity with that older desktop part in aggregate. The AMD Ryzen 5 7530U has an avgBenchmarkScore of 21133, also in the 75th percentile, and its closest rival is the Intel Core Ultra 7 256V (21112, delta 0.1%). The 307-point gap in average scores between the two processors in this comparison is modest, but the distribution of wins heavily favors Intel.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V is built on the Lunar Lake architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 3 nm process node. It features 8 cores and 8 threads, meaning it has no simultaneous multithreading. The AMD Ryzen 5 7530U uses the Zen 3 architecture (codenamed Barcelo-R), also from TSMC but on a larger 7 nm process node. It offers 6 cores and 12 threads, relying on simultaneous multithreading to fill its execution pipelines.

The cache hierarchy differs substantially. Intel allocates 192 KB of L1 cache per core and 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, with 8 MB of shared L3 cache. AMD’s configuration uses 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a much larger 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger L3 on the AMD part likely contributes to its strong data compression result, as more data can be cached closer to the cores. However, Intel’s larger per-core L1 and L2 allocations support its single-threaded dominance.

Memory support is another point of divergence. The AMD Ryzen 5 7530U supports DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus and a rated bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory, which the Intel part does not. The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V lists memory support as dependent on the motherboard, with a dual-channel bus, but no specific bandwidth figure is provided. The AMD part’s ECC support makes it relevant for certain reliability-conscious mobile workstations.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Intel chip provides Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only), while the AMD chip offers Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The Gen 5 interface on the Intel part offers a newer standard, but the AMD part has more lanes, which could matter for systems needing to connect multiple devices directly to the CPU. The integrated graphics differ as well: Intel uses Arc 130V, while AMD uses Radeon Graphics (Vega 6).

The physical specifications highlight the process node advantage. The Intel chip is built on 3 nm, while AMD uses 7 nm. The AMD part’s die size is listed at 180 mm² with 10,700 million transistors. No comparable die size or transistor count is provided for the Intel part. The TDP figures are close—17 watts for Intel and 15 watts for AMD—but the Intel part achieves its higher performance within a 2-watt higher envelope. Both chips use sockets specific to their platforms: Intel BGA 2833 for the Ultra 5 228V and AMD Socket FP6 for the Ryzen 5 7530U.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V is consistently faster in single-threaded tests. In cinebench_r23_singlecore it scores 1758 versus 1441 for the AMD Ryzen 5 7530U, a 22% advantage. The passmark_single_thread test confirms this with a 25.8% delta (3836 vs 3049).

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen 5 7530U win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, the AMD chip wins two of the 15 head-to-head tests. It beats Intel in passmark_integer_math by 31.1% (57609 vs 39679) and in passmark_data_compression by 6.4% (185860 vs 173924).

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7530U has 6 cores and 12 threads. Despite having fewer cores, the AMD part uses simultaneous multithreading to reach 12 threads, but this does not translate into a multi-core win.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7530U has 16 MB of shared L3 cache, which is double the 8 MB shared L3 cache of the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V. Intel compensates with larger per-core L1 and L2 caches.

Q: What are the process nodes for these two processors?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V is manufactured on a 3 nm process, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7530U uses a 7 nm process. Both are produced by TSMC.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen 5 7530U supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V does not.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core Ultra 5 228V | AMD Ryzen 5 7530U |

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

| Series | Core Ultra Series 2 | 7000 series |

| Cores | 8 | 6 |

| Threads | 8 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 2.10 GHz | 2000.00 MHz |

| TDP | 17 W | 15 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 2833 | AMD Socket FP6 |

| Architecture | Lunar Lake | Zen 3 |

| Codename | Lunar Lake | Barcelo-R |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | Not listed | 10,700 million |

| Die Size | Not listed | 180 mm² |

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

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

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 16 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | Depends on motherboard | DDR4 |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not listed | 51.2 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

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

| Integrated Graphics | Arc 130V | Radeon Graphics (Vega 6) |

| Release Date | 2024-09-23 | 2023-01-03 |

| Part Number | SRPMVSRPMU | 100-000000943 |

Both processors share a dual-channel memory bus, a mobile market segment, an active production status, and a locked multiplier. Neither has a listed launch MSRP. The Intel part’s boost clock is 4.50 GHz, and the AMD part’s boost clock is also 4.50 GHz, so these are not listed as differing fields.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V is the superior processor for the vast majority of workloads. It wins 13 of 15 benchmarks, dominates single-core performance by margins between 15.6% and 25.8%, and leads multi-core scores by approximately 17-19%. Its advantage in floating-point math (71.6% over the Ryzen) and physics (129.6%) is so large that any workload involving simulation, scientific computing, or graphics-adjacent processing would strongly favor the Intel chip.

The AMD Ryzen 5 7530U is not without merit. Its 31.1% victory in integer math and 6.4% win in data compression indicate that specific integer-heavy or compression-focused tasks will run faster on the AMD chip. The larger 16 MB L3 cache and ECC memory support give it a structural advantage for those who need reliability features or work with data sets that benefit from larger caching. The 12 threads versus 8 threads also suggest that AMD’s scheduling model may be preferable in certain parallel workloads, though the benchmark data does not show this translating into a win.

For a general-purpose mobile processor, the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V is the clear choice. Its average benchmark score of 21440 places it in the 75th percentile, and its closest rival by average score is the AMD Ryzen 5 2600, a desktop part that it matches. The AMD Ryzen 5 7530U, with an average score of 21133, is also in the 75th percentile, but its nearest rival is the Intel Core Ultra 7 256V, a higher-tier part in the same family. The Ultra 5 228V’s 3 nm process node and newer Lunar Lake architecture deliver a tangible performance edge over the Zen 3-based Ryzen, despite the AMD part’s two-year earlier release date. Users who prioritize integer math or compression should consider the AMD part, but the data supports Intel for nearly everything else.