AMD Ryzen 7 260 vs Intel Core Ultra X9 388H Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H and AMD Ryzen 7 260 are both high-performance mobile processors, but the benchmark data shows a clear and consistent performance hierarchy. The Intel chip wins 14 of the 15 head-to-head comparisons, often by substantial margins, while the AMD processor secures a single victory in one specialized workload. This analysis breaks down the data to show exactly where each chip excels and who should consider which part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most significant victory for the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H comes in the PassMark find prime numbers test, where it scores 358 versus the AMD Ryzen 7 260's 77. That is a 364.9% advantage, a massive gap that suggests the Intel architecture handles this particular integer workload with far greater efficiency. Similarly, the PassMark physics test shows a 164.9% lead for Intel (3226 vs 1218), indicating a major difference in how the two chips handle physics simulations. The PassMark floating point math test also heavily favors Intel, with a score of 112550 versus 59462, an 89.3% delta. In multi-threaded throughput, the Intel part scores 36811 on PassMark multithread compared to 28078 for AMD, a 31.1% lead that reflects the difference in core count and architecture.

Single-core performance is another area where Intel dominates. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the X9 388H scores 2200.5 against 1770.5 for the Ryzen 7 260, a 24.3% advantage. The Cinebench R15 single-core test shows a similar pattern, with Intel leading 309.5 to 276.5 (an 11.9% delta). The PassMark single-thread result confirms this, with Intel at 4280 and AMD at 3736, a 14.6% lead. This consistent single-core superiority suggests better per-thread performance for the Intel chip, which is crucial for lightly-threaded applications like games and many productivity tasks.

In data encryption (PassMark), Intel wins 28490 to 20267, a 40.6% advantage. The extended instructions test shows Intel ahead by 12.8% (29943 vs 26544). The multi-core Cinebench results also favor Intel: in Cinebench R23 multi-core, Intel scores 18911 versus 17211.5, a 9.9% lead, and in Cinebench R15 multi-core, Intel wins 2955 to 2747.5, a 7.6% delta. The data compression test is closer, with Intel at 361763 and AMD at 351517, a 2.9% lead.

The AMD Ryzen 7 260's sole victory is in PassMark integer math, where it scores 96737 versus Intel's 90882. That is a 6.1% advantage for AMD. This is a notable result because it shows the AMD chip can outperform Intel in a specific arithmetic-heavy workload, even though it loses the overall multithreaded test by a large margin. The random string sorting test is close, with Intel winning 44010 to 42383 (a 3.8% delta), but it's still a win for Intel.

The overall average benchmark scores reflect this imbalance. The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H has an average benchmark score of 44466, placing it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs, while the AMD Ryzen 7 260 scores 43717, also in the 88th percentile. The nearest rivals for the Intel chip include the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D (44573, -0.2% delta) and Intel Core i9-13950HX (44342, 0.3% delta), showing it is right in line with those parts. The AMD Ryzen 7 260's nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 7745 (43704, 0% delta), indicating it is a solid performer in its own tier.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is significantly faster in single-core tests. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 2200.5 versus 1770.5 for the AMD Ryzen 7 260, and in PassMark single-thread, it scores 4280 versus 3736. This gives Intel a 24.3% lead in the Cinebench test and a 14.6% lead in the PassMark test.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen 7 260 win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, it wins one test: PassMark integer math. In that test, AMD scores 96737 while Intel scores 90882, yielding a 6.1% advantage for the Ryzen 7 260. This is the only head-to-head comparison where AMD comes out on top.

Q: How significant is the difference in multi-threaded performance?

A: The Intel chip has a substantial lead in multi-threaded workloads. In PassMark multithread, Intel scores 36811 versus 28078, a 31.1% advantage. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, Intel leads 18911 to 17211.5, which is a 9.9% delta. These results indicate Intel is the better choice for heavily threaded tasks.

Q: What is the difference in core and thread counts?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The AMD Ryzen 7 260 has 8 cores and 16 threads. Both support 16 threads, but the Intel chip achieves this with more physical cores, while AMD uses simultaneous multithreading on its 8 cores.

Q: How do the integrated graphics compare?

A: The Intel chip features the Arc B390 integrated graphics, while the AMD chip features the Radeon 780M. The data does not include any benchmark scores for these iGPUs, so a performance comparison cannot be made from the provided information.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth for each processor?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H supports LPDDR5X memory with a bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s, while the AMD Ryzen 7 260 supports DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. This gives Intel a 64 GB/s higher memory bandwidth figure.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures and manufacturing processes. The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is based on the Panther Lake architecture, built on an Intel 3 nm process node, and fabricated by Intel. It uses the "Core Ultra Series 3" branding and features 16 cores with 16 threads. Its cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The chip is part of the Panther Lake-H generation and fits into the Intel BGA 2540 socket.

The AMD Ryzen 7 260 uses the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed "Hawk Point," and is built on a 4 nm process node by TSMC. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, with 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The chip has 25,000 million transistors and a die size of 178 mm². It fits into the AMD Socket FP8. The Intel chip uses LPDDR5X memory with a dual-channel bus, while the AMD chip uses DDR5 memory, also with a dual-channel bus. Intel's memory bandwidth is listed at 153.6 GB/s, compared to 89.6 GB/s for AMD.

In terms of PCIe support, the Intel chip offers Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only), while the AMD chip offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The Intel chip has a lower TDP of 25 watts versus 45 watts for the AMD chip, despite having more cores. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The Intel part is the newer release, with a release date in 2026, while the AMD part was released in 2025. Both are classified as active mobile processors with no ECC memory support.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is the superior processor for almost all workloads. It wins 14 out of 15 head-to-head comparisons, including all the multi-core, single-core, and most specialized tests. The margins are often large, particularly in physics (164.9%), floating point math (89.3%), and data encryption (40.6%). The Intel chip also has a higher average benchmark score (44466 vs 43717). The data shows that the Intel chip is about 9.9% faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 24.3% faster in Cinebench R23 single-core, making it the clear choice for demanding applications.

However, the AMD Ryzen 7 260 is not without merit. It wins the PassMark integer math test by 6.1%, showing a specific strength in that area. It also has a higher base clock of 3.80 GHz versus 2.10 GHz for Intel, although both boost to 5.10 GHz. The AMD chip offers more PCIe lanes (20 vs 4) and uses the more common DDR5 memory standard. If a workload is heavily dependent on integer math, the AMD chip could be the better option. The data also shows the AMD chip is in the same performance percentile (88th) as the Intel chip, meaning it is a strong performer in its own right.

For the vast majority of users, the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is the better choice. Its wins in Cinebench and PassMark multithread tests indicate it handles both short bursts and sustained loads better. The single-core advantage is also critical for responsiveness. The only scenario where the AMD chip is preferable is when the specific application is dominated by integer math operations, where it holds a measurable edge.

Specification Differences

The following table lists the key specifications where the two processors differ:

| Specification | Intel Core Ultra X9 388H | AMD Ryzen 7 260 |

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

| Cores | 16 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 2.10 GHz | 3.80 GHz |

| TDP | 25 W | 45 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 2540 | AMD Socket FP8 |

| Architecture | Panther Lake | Zen 4 (Hawk Point) |

| Process Node | 3 nm (Intel) | 4 nm (TSMC) |

| Transistors | Not specified | 25,000 million |

| Die Size | Not specified | 178 mm² |

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

| L2 Cache | 3 MB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |

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

| Memory Support | LPDDR5X | DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 153.6 GB/s | 89.6 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 4 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Arc B390 | Radeon 780M |

| Release Date | 2026 | 2025 |

| Part Number | SA4QWQ9EK | 100-000001724 |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is the winner for any workload that benefits from high single-thread performance or heavy multi-threading. Its 24.3% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core makes it ideal for general productivity, web browsing, and applications that rely on a few fast cores. Its 31.1% lead in PassMark multithread and 9.9% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core make it the better choice for video editing, 3D rendering, software compilation, and other parallel workloads. The massive 164.9% lead in the physics test also suggests it is better suited for physics simulations in engineering or scientific computing.

The AMD Ryzen 7 260's only clear win is in PassMark integer math, where it beats Intel by 6.1%. This makes it the preferable option for applications that are specifically optimized for integer arithmetic, such as certain cryptography, financial modeling, or data processing tasks. Its higher base clock of 3.80 GHz, compared to Intel's 2.10 GHz, might also offer better responsiveness in light, short-duration tasks that don't scale with core count. The AMD chip also offers more CPU PCIe lanes (20 vs 4), which could be relevant for users needing to connect multiple high-speed devices directly to the CPU. However, for the broadest range of applications, the data overwhelmingly favors the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H.