AMD Ryzen 7 250 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 356H Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H records an average benchmark score of 41215, placing it in the 87th percentile of all CPUs. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 scores 38221 on average, which lands in the 86th percentile.

Q: How much faster is the Intel chip in multi-core rendering?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H scores 18395 versus 14676 for the AMD Ryzen 7 250, a difference of 20.2%. The Intel chip also wins Cinebench R15 multi-core by 24.6%, scoring 3055 against 2302.

Q: Are there any tests where the AMD processor wins?

A: Yes, the AMD Ryzen 7 250 wins PassMark integer math with a score of 91565, which is 10.2% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H’s 83111. That is the only head-to-head benchmark win for AMD out of 15 recorded tests.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 250 has a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H boosts to 4.70 GHz. Despite the lower boost clock, the Intel chip wins every single-thread benchmark in the head-to-head set.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H leads in PassMark single-thread with 4072 versus 3678 for AMD, a 9.7% advantage. In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 2040 against 1715, a 15.9% lead, and in Cinebench R15 single-core, Intel leads 303 to 269, an 11.2% margin.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth specifications for each?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a dual-channel bus and a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 supports DDR5 on a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 7 250 is built on the Zen 4 architecture with the Hawk Point codename, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It integrates 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The processor uses AMD Socket FP8 and belongs to the Ryzen 7 generation. Its cache layout consists of 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The integrated graphics are Radeon 780M. PCIe support is Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H uses the Panther Lake architecture, also the codename for the chip, and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3 generation. It is fabricated by Intel on a 3 nm process. Transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database. The chip uses Intel BGA 2540. Cache per core is larger: 192 KB of L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and the shared L3 cache is 18 MB. Integrated graphics are Intel Xe3 Graphics. PCIe support is Gen 5 with 12 CPU lanes.

The core configuration differs significantly. The AMD chip has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel chip has 16 cores and 16 threads. That means Intel does not use simultaneous multithreading: it has twice the core count but the same thread count as AMD. The AMD chip draws a TDP of 28 watts, while the Intel chip is rated at 25 watts. Base clocks are far apart: AMD runs at 3.30 GHz, Intel at 1.90 GHz. Boost clocks reverse that order: AMD reaches 5.10 GHz, Intel reaches 4.70 GHz.

Both processors are mobile parts, both are active in production, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. Neither supports ECC memory. The AMD chip was released on January 5, 2025, while the Intel chip’s release date is January 4, 2026. The part numbers are 100-000001722 for AMD and SA4RGQ9EU for Intel. No launch MSRP is recorded for either chip.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to a clear overall winner: the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H dominates the head-to-head comparison, taking 14 of 15 recorded benchmarks. Its average score of 41215 is roughly 7.8% higher than the AMD Ryzen 7 250’s 38221. The Intel chip also sits one percentile higher in the global distribution, at 87 versus 86.

The AMD Ryzen 7 250 does have one meaningful strength: integer math. Its PassMark integer score of 91565 beats Intel’s 83111 by 10.2%. For workloads that are integer-heavy and not fully threaded, the AMD part can hold its own. But the Intel chip wins every other category, and many of those wins are large.

For rendering, compression, encryption, physics, and floating-point workloads, the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H is the stronger choice. The margin in floating-point math is 48.3%, and in physics it is 60.4%. The Intel chip also leads in multi-threaded PassMark by 26.2% and in Cinebench R23 multi-core by 20.2%.

The AMD part should be selected when the workload is specifically integer math and the platform preference is for AMD’s Zen 4 architecture, TSMC 4 nm process, or AMD Socket FP8. The Intel chip should be selected for nearly anything else, especially if the application scales across many cores, uses floating-point math, or benefits from single-thread speed. The data does not support recommending the AMD chip for any other benchmark category in this comparison.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 7 250 | Intel Core Ultra 7 356H |

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

| Cores | 8 | 16 |

| Threads | 16 | 16 |

| Base clock | 3.30 GHz | 1.90 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.10 GHz | 4.70 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 25 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Panther Lake |

| Codename | Hawk Point | Panther Lake |

| Process node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

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

| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 16 MB (shared) | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 115.2 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 lanes | Gen 5, 12 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon 780M | Intel Xe3 Graphics |

| Transistors | 25,000 million | Not recorded |

| Die size | 178 mm² | Not recorded |

| Release date | 2025-01-05 | 2026-01-04 |

| Part number | 100-000001722 | SA4RGQ9EU |

Fields that are identical are not listed: both are mobile processors, both are active in production, both use dual-channel memory, both lack ECC support, both have locked multipliers, and neither has a recorded launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H wins 14 of the 15 head-to-head tests, and the margins are often substantial. The largest Intel win is in PassMark find prime numbers, where Intel scores 327 against AMD’s 73, a 77.7% lead. That is the single biggest gap in the entire comparison.

PassMark physics is nearly as lopsided: Intel scores 2895, AMD scores 1147, a 60.4% difference. Floating-point math also favors Intel heavily, 103128 versus 53285, a 48.3% margin. Data encryption shows Intel at 26345 against 17661, a 33.0% lead. Multi-threaded PassMark has Intel at 33978 versus 25089, a 26.2% edge.

Cinebench results follow the same pattern. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, Intel wins 3055 to 2302, a 24.6% difference. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, Intel wins 18395 to 14676, a 20.2% margin. Extended instructions in PassMark go to Intel by 22.5%, with scores of 27898 and 21613. Random string sorting goes to Intel by 12.5%, 40990 to 35861. Data compression goes to Intel by 10.6%, 336177 to 300708.

Single-thread tests also favor Intel, though by smaller margins. PassMark single-thread has Intel at 4072 versus 3678, a 9.7% lead. Cinebench R15 single-core is 303 to 269, an 11.2% margin. Cinebench R23 single-core is 2040 to 1715, a 15.9% advantage.

The AMD Ryzen 7 250’s only win is PassMark integer math, where it scores 91565 against Intel’s 83111, a 10.2% margin. That win is real and consistent with AMD’s architecture, but it stands alone in this data set.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H wins across rendering, physics simulation, encryption, compression, sorting, extended instruction workloads, and all single-thread tests. The data shows it is the stronger processor for multi-core rendering, with Cinebench R23 multi-core at 18395 and Cinebench R15 multi-core at 3055. Physics workloads are a strong point, with a PassMark physics score of 2895, more than double the AMD chip’s 1147. Floating-point math is another clear Intel strength at 103128, nearly double AMD’s 53285. For encryption, Intel’s 26345 beats AMD’s 17661 by a wide margin. Data compression also favors Intel, 336177 to 300708.

The AMD Ryzen 7 250 wins only in PassMark integer math, with 91565 against Intel’s 83111. That result indicates the AMD chip handles integer-heavy instruction streams more efficiently than the Intel part, despite losing every other benchmark. For a workload that is dominated by integer arithmetic and does not scale across many threads, the AMD part is the better fit. The data does not show any other category where AMD takes the lead.

The overall database comparison also places the two chips in different competitive neighborhoods. The AMD Ryzen 7 250’s nearest rivals are the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T at 38194 with a 0.1% delta, the Intel Core i5-13600HX at 38261 with a -0.1% delta, the Intel Core i5-14490F at 38149 with a 0.2% delta, and the Intel Core Ultra 9 285H at 38312 with a -0.2% delta. The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H’s nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 at 41208 with a 0% delta, the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H at 41263 with a -0.1% delta, the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X at 41376 with a -0.4% delta, and the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H at 40967 with a 0.6% delta. The Intel chip’s average score sits in a higher performance band, and its nearest rivals are all within 0.6% of its score, indicating a tightly grouped tier of competing processors.