AMD Ryzen 5 9500F vs Intel Core Ultra 5 336H Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded benchmark data splits these two processors into clearly distinct roles. The AMD Ryzen 5 9500F wins 5 of the 11 head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H wins 6. Despite that near-even split, the nature of the wins tells a sharper story. The AMD part dominates integer-heavy workloads by a wide margin, while the Intel part excels in floating-point math, physics simulation, and prime-number finding. For users prioritizing single-thread responsiveness and integer throughput, the 9500F is the stronger choice. For users running floating-point-heavy tasks or needing an integrated GPU in a mobile chassis, the 336H holds the edge. The 9500F sits at the 91st percentile among all CPUs, while the 336H lands at the 84th percentile. The AMD chip also delivers a higher average benchmark score (52873 versus 34485), though that average includes different test suites for each part, so direct comparison requires caution.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 5 9500F uses the Zen 5 architecture on the Granite Ridge codename, built on a 4 nm TSMC process with 8,315 million transistors on a 70.6 mm² die. It packs 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H uses the Panther Lake architecture, built on Intel's 3 nm process. It has 16 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The core counts differ dramatically: the 336H has more than double the cores but no extra threads beyond its core count, while the 9500F uses simultaneous multithreading to double its thread count.

Cache layouts also diverge. The 9500F offers 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3. The 336H offers 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and only 18 MB of shared L3. The AMD chip's larger L3 pool likely helps in workloads that reuse data across cores. The Intel part's larger per-core L1 and L2 caches may benefit single-threaded bursts. Memory support differs as well: the 9500F supports DDR5 only with dual-channel memory and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the 336H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with dual-channel memory and 115.2 GB/s bandwidth. ECC memory is available on the AMD side but not on the Intel side. PCIe lane counts also differ: the 9500F provides Gen 5 with 24 lanes from the CPU, while the 336H provides Gen 5 with 12 lanes.

The integrated graphics situation is a major split. The 9500F has no integrated GPU, which is typical for an F-series desktop part. The 336H includes Intel Xe3 Graphics, making it a complete mobile package without a discrete GPU. The 9500F targets desktops with an AM5 socket and an unlocked multiplier, while the 336H is a mobile BGA 2540 part with a locked multiplier. The 9500F carries a 65 W TDP, whereas the 336H is rated at just 25 W, reflecting its mobile intent.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The biggest win for the AMD Ryzen 5 9500F comes in PassMark integer math, where it scores 84198 against the Intel part's 62070, a 35.7% advantage. This is a decisive lead that suggests the 9500F handles integer-heavy computation, such as database operations or general-purpose code, with far greater efficiency. The second-largest AMD win is in data compression, with a score of 325678 versus 280340, a 16.2% margin. The 9500F also leads in extended instructions (26370 versus 24542, 7.4% ahead) and in single-thread performance, where it scores 4258 against the 336H's 4013, a 6.1% edge in both the single_thread and singlethread tests.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H counters with several wins, some of them substantial. Its largest lead is in floating-point math: 82415 versus 56570, a 31.4% advantage. That is a massive margin and points to the 336H being far better suited for scientific computing or media processing that relies on floating-point operations. The 336H also wins in physics simulation (2682 versus 1851, 31% ahead) and in finding prime numbers (299 versus 220, 26.4% ahead). Data encryption goes to Intel as well: 21291 versus 15716, a 26.2% lead. The multithread test is nearly a tie, with the 336H scoring 28545 versus the 9500F's 28312, a 0.8% edge. Random string sorting also goes to Intel, but by a hair: 34402 versus 34174, a 0.7% margin.

The pattern is clear. AMD wins where integer throughput and single-thread speed matter. Intel wins where floating-point throughput and parallel core scaling matter. The 336H's 16 physical cores give it an advantage in embarrassingly parallel workloads like physics and prime-number searches, while the 9500F's higher boost clock and larger L3 cache help it dominate integer tasks.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better single-thread performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 9500F scores 4258 in PassMark single-thread tests, which is 6.1% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H's score of 4013. The 9500F's boost clock of 5.00 GHz versus 4.60 GHz on the 336H likely contributes to this lead.

Q: Which processor is better for floating-point math?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H wins decisively, scoring 82415 in PassMark floating-point math versus 56570 for the AMD Ryzen 5 9500F, a 31.4% advantage. The 336H's 16 cores provide more parallel floating-point throughput.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen 5 9500F supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H does not. This makes the 9500F a better fit for systems requiring error-correcting memory.

Q: Which processor has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H has a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, compared to 89.6 GB/s for the AMD Ryzen 5 9500F. The 336H also supports LPDDR5X in addition to DDR5, while the 9500F supports only DDR5.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H includes integrated graphics, specifically Intel Xe3 Graphics. The AMD Ryzen 5 9500F has no integrated GPU, so it requires a discrete graphics card.

Q: Which processor has a higher percentile ranking?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 9500F ranks at the 91st percentile among all CPUs, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H ranks at the 84th percentile. The 9500F also has a higher average benchmark score of 52873 versus 34485, though the test suites differ.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 9500F wins in data compression, extended instructions, integer math, and both single-thread tests. Those are classic desktop workloads: code compilation, spreadsheet calculations, and general-purpose productivity software that relies heavily on integer arithmetic. The 9500F's 32 MB of shared L3 cache likely helps keep frequently accessed data close to the cores, and its 5.00 GHz boost clock gives it an edge in latency-sensitive tasks. The 65 W TDP and AM5 socket make it a straightforward drop-in for a desktop build, though it requires a discrete GPU since it has no integrated graphics.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H wins in data encryption, prime-number finding, floating-point math, multithread, physics, and random string sorting. These are workloads that scale with core count and benefit from the 336H's 16 physical cores. Encryption algorithms often use floating-point operations, and physics simulation is inherently parallel. The 336H's 25 W TDP and integrated Xe3 Graphics make it suitable for thin-and-light mobile systems where power efficiency is a priority. Its support for LPDDR5X memory adds flexibility for compact designs.

For users building a desktop workstation focused on integer-heavy code, database queries, or single-threaded applications, the 9500F delivers decisive wins. For users needing a mobile processor that can handle floating-point simulation, encryption, or parallel math workloads without a discrete GPU, the 336H is the clear choice. The multithread test is essentially a tie, so that workload alone does not differentiate the two.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. The AMD Ryzen 5 9500F has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 3.80 GHz for AMD and 1.90 GHz for Intel, while boost clocks are 5.00 GHz for AMD and 4.60 GHz for Intel. TDP ratings are 65 W for AMD and 25 W for Intel. The sockets differ entirely: AM5 for AMD, BGA 2540 for Intel.

Process technology separates them: the 9500F uses a 4 nm TSMC process, while the 336H uses Intel's 3 nm process. Cache capacities vary: L1 is 80 KB per core on AMD versus 192 KB per core on Intel; L2 is 1 MB per core on AMD versus 2.5 MB per core on Intel; L3 is 32 MB shared on AMD versus 18 MB shared on Intel. Memory support differs: AMD supports DDR5 only, Intel supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s for AMD versus 115.2 GB/s for Intel. ECC memory is available on AMD but not on Intel. PCIe lanes are 24 on AMD versus 12 on Intel, both Gen 5. Integrated graphics exist only on Intel, with Xe3 Graphics. The AMD part has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel part is locked. Release dates differ: the 9500F launched in September 2025, while the 336H launched in January 2026. The AMD part carries a launch MSRP of $219; the Intel part has no recorded launch MSRP.