AMD Ryzen 7 160 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 336H Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 160 records an average benchmark score of 37,117, placing it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H records a lower average score of 34,485, placing it in the 84th percentile.

Q: How do the two compare in single-threaded performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H leads in PassMark single-thread testing with a score of 4,013, which is 14.4% higher than the AMD Ryzen 7 160's score of 3,435. The Intel part also posts a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3,387.

Q: Which processor wins in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H dominates the PassMark multi-thread test with a score of 28,545, which is 57.1% higher than the AMD Ryzen 7 160's score of 12,237. The Intel chip also records a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23,991.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 160 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H has 16 cores and 16 threads, meaning the Intel part has twice the core count but the same thread count, indicating it does not use simultaneous multi-threading.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H supports a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, compared to the AMD Ryzen 7 160's 76.8 GB/s. The Intel part also supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, while the AMD part supports DDR5 only.

Q: What are the process nodes and foundries for each chip?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 160 is built on TSMC's 6 nm process with a die size of 210 mm². The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H is built on Intel's 3 nm process; no die size is recorded for the Intel part.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear split between the two processors. The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H wins 10 of the 11 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, including decisive victories in multi-threaded workloads, floating-point math, physics, and prime number finding. Its PassMark multi-thread score of 28,545 versus the AMD's 12,237 represents a 57.1% advantage, and its floating-point math score of 82,415 is nearly 12 times the AMD's 6,673. For users who run heavily parallel workloads, video encoding, compilation, or physics simulations, the Intel part is the obvious choice based on the recorded data.

The AMD Ryzen 7 160 wins only one head-to-head test: PassMark integer math, where its score of 81,370 beats the Intel's 62,070 by 31.1%. This suggests that in integer-heavy single-threaded or lightly threaded applications, the AMD chip can outperform its rival. However, the Intel part still holds a 14.4% lead in the single-thread PassMark test overall, so the AMD advantage appears confined to a specific workload type.

The average benchmark scores tell a slightly different story. The AMD Ryzen 7 160's average score of 37,117 is higher than the Intel's 34,485, and the AMD chip sits at the 85th percentile versus the Intel's 84th. This discrepancy arises because the average score includes the AMD's strong integer math result, while the Intel part's dominance in other tests is spread across more benchmarks. The AMD chip also has a higher boost clock at 4.75 GHz versus 4.60 GHz, which may contribute to its integer performance advantage.

For buyers prioritizing overall multi-threaded throughput and modern memory bandwidth, the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H delivers consistently stronger results across most measured categories. The AMD Ryzen 7 160 remains competitive in specific integer workloads and posts a higher average score overall, but its single-digit wins in the head-to-head comparison limit its appeal for general-purpose computing.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H secures a dominant position in nearly every PassMark subtest. The largest margin appears in floating-point math, where the Intel scores 82,415 against the AMD's 6,673, a delta of 91.9% in favor of Intel. This indicates a fundamental advantage in FPU throughput, likely tied to the Intel part's 16 physical cores versus the AMD's 8.

The prime number finding test shows a similar pattern: Intel scores 299 versus AMD's 43, a gap of 85.6%. This test often stresses integer and branch-heavy code, yet the Intel architecture still wins decisively. The physics test, which typically relies on multi-core scaling, also favors Intel heavily: 2,682 versus 793, a 70.4% delta.

Data compression and encryption also go to Intel. The compression test shows Intel at 280,340 versus AMD's 242,634, a 13.5% lead. Encryption shows a larger gap: 21,291 versus 15,520, a 27.1% delta. Extended instruction workloads, which may leverage AVX or similar ISA extensions, favor Intel by 34.1% (24,542 versus 16,170). Random string sorting, a memory-latency-sensitive test, goes to Intel by 24.5% (34,402 versus 25,981).

The multi-thread PassMark test confirms Intel's aggregate lead: 28,545 versus 12,237, a 57.1% delta. This result aligns with the core count difference, as the Intel chip has 16 cores available. The single-thread test shows a smaller but still meaningful Intel advantage of 14.4% (4,013 versus 3,435), which also appears in the duplicated single-thread score entry.

The AMD Ryzen 7 160's sole victory comes in integer math, where its 81,370 score beats the Intel's 62,070 by 31.1%. This is a substantial margin and suggests that the AMD's Zen 3+ architecture handles integer-heavy code more efficiently per thread. However, this single win does not offset the Intel's nine other victories in the head-to-head set.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts differ sharply. The AMD Ryzen 7 160 provides 8 cores and 16 threads, using simultaneous multi-threading to reach 16 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H provides 16 cores and 16 threads, meaning each core operates as a single thread without SMT. This structural difference explains the Intel's multi-thread advantage despite the equal thread count.

Clock speeds also differ. The AMD chip has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.75 GHz. The Intel chip has a lower base clock of 1.90 GHz but a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The AMD part's higher boost clock may contribute to its integer math win, while the Intel part's higher core count compensates in parallel workloads.

Thermal design power (TDP) values are close: the AMD is rated at 28 W, the Intel at 25 W. Both are mobile processors, with the AMD using AMD Socket FP7 and the Intel using Intel BGA 2540. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Memory support differs in both type and bandwidth. The AMD supports DDR5 only, with dual-channel memory and 76.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, but with a higher 115.2 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD supports ECC memory; the Intel does not.

PCIe connectivity differs significantly. The AMD provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The Intel provides Gen 5 with 12 lanes (CPU only). The Intel's newer PCIe generation offers higher per-lane bandwidth, but the AMD has more total lanes.

Integrated graphics also differ. The AMD uses Radeon 680M graphics, while the Intel uses Intel Xe3 Graphics. The database does not include graphics benchmark scores for either part.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 7 160 uses the Zen 3+ architecture under the codename Rembrandt-R, part of the Ryzen 7 generation. It is manufactured on TSMC's 6 nm process with a die size of 210 mm². The cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H uses the Panther Lake architecture, specifically Panther Lake-H, under the Core Ultra Series 3 branding. It is manufactured on Intel's 3 nm process; no die size is recorded. The cache hierarchy is substantially larger: 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache.

The L2 cache difference is particularly notable. The Intel part offers 2.5 MB per core, which is nearly five times the AMD's 512 KB per core. This larger per-core cache likely supports the Intel's superior performance in memory-intensive tests like random string sorting and data compression. The L3 cache difference is smaller but still favors Intel: 18 MB versus 16 MB.

The manufacturing process difference is also significant. The Intel part uses a 3 nm process, while the AMD part uses 6 nm. A smaller process node typically enables higher transistor density and better power efficiency, although the database does not include transistor counts for either chip. The Intel chip's lower TDP of 25 W despite having 16 cores suggests the 3 nm process provides efficiency benefits.

The release dates differ by several months. The AMD Ryzen 7 160 has a release date of September 30, 2025. The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H has a release date of January 4, 2026. Both parts are listed as Active in production status.

The memory controller design differs as well. The Intel part supports LPDDR5X in addition to DDR5, which is common for mobile platforms seeking lower power. The AMD part supports only DDR5. The Intel part's memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s is 50% higher than the AMD's 76.8 GB/s, which may benefit workloads with large data sets.