AMD Ryzen 7 5705G vs Intel Core Ultra 7 356H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains benchmark results for the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H across Cinebench and Passmark workloads, while the AMD Ryzen 7 5705G has no benchmark entries in the database. This asymmetry means the comparison relies on the Intel part’s measured scores and the AMD part’s architectural specifications, with relative positioning inferred from the Intel processor’s nearest rivals.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 18395 and a single-core score of 2040. In Cinebench R20, the multi-core result is 12153 with a single-core score of 1715. The older Cinebench R15 test shows 3055 multi-core and 303 single-core. These numbers indicate strong scaling from the 16-core, 16-thread configuration, though the single-thread scores are modest relative to the multi-core figures, likely reflecting the 1.90 GHz base clock and 4.70 GHz boost clock.

Passmark results for the Intel part show a multi-thread score of 33978 and a single-thread score of 4072. The integer math workload scores 83111, while floating point math reaches 103128. Data compression scores 336177, data encryption scores 26345, and extended instructions score 27898. Prime number finding scores 327, random string sorting scores 40990, and physics scores 2895. The high data compression and floating point numbers suggest strong sustained throughput in those specific instruction patterns.

Since the AMD Ryzen 7 5705G has no benchmark scores in the database, its average benchmark score is recorded as 0, and its percentile versus all CPUs is 50. The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H, by contrast, holds an average benchmark score of 41215 and sits at the 87th percentile. That percentile gap indicates the Intel processor outperforms the majority of recorded CPUs, while the AMD part’s percentile is based on its specification profile rather than measured workloads.

The nearest rivals for the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H provide context for its standing. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 scores 41208, a delta of 0%, meaning the two are effectively tied in average score. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H scores 41263, which is 0.1% higher. The AMD Ryzen 9 5900X scores 41376, 0.4% higher. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H scores 40967, 0.6% lower. These deltas are all within a single percentage point, indicating that the Core Ultra 7 356H sits in a tightly clustered performance band among its direct competitors.

The absence of AMD Ryzen 7 5705G benchmark data means no direct head-to-head wins can be assigned to either processor. The wins counter in the database shows 0 for both parts. The Intel part’s recorded scores, however, demonstrate a capability level that places it above the 50th percentile baseline of the AMD part. The AMD part’s 8 cores and 16 threads, with a 3.80 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost, suggest competitive single-thread performance, but without measured scores, the database cannot confirm any advantage.

The Verdict

From the recorded data alone, the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H is the only processor with verified benchmark results. Its 87th percentile ranking and average score of 41215 position it clearly above the AMD Ryzen 7 5705G, which has a 50th percentile and no average score. The Intel part’s nearest rivals, all within 0.6% of its average score, show that it competes directly with other modern high-end mobile and desktop parts, including the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X.

The AMD Ryzen 7 5705G, with its 65 W TDP and desktop socket, targets a different usage profile. Its 8 cores and 16 threads at a 3.80 GHz base clock, boosting to 4.60 GHz, indicate strong per-core capability for lightly threaded tasks. The 16 MB L3 cache and 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth with DDR4 support suggest a balance suited to desktop workloads where memory bandwidth is adequate but not exceptional.

For users selecting between these two, the data supports the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H for any workload that benefits from measured multi-threaded performance. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 18395 and Passmark multi-thread score of 33978 confirm that the 16-core design delivers consistent throughput. The AMD part lacks any such recorded evidence, so its suitability cannot be quantified from the database.

The Intel part’s mobile segment and 25 W TDP, combined with its 3 nm process node from Intel, imply efficiency advantages in portable systems. The AMD part’s 7 nm TSMC process and 65 W TDP indicate a desktop-oriented power envelope. The database does not list power consumption measurements, so any efficiency claims remain qualitative.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge fundamentally in architecture. The AMD Ryzen 7 5705G uses Zen 3 architecture with the Cezanne codename, built on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It contains 10,700 million transistors on a 180 mm² die. The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H uses Panther Lake architecture with the Panther Lake codename, built on a 3 nm process at Intel. No transistor count or die size is recorded for the Intel part.

Core and thread counts differ significantly. The AMD part has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel part has 16 cores and 16 threads. This means the Intel processor uses cores without hyperthreading, whereas the AMD processor uses simultaneous multithreading to reach 16 threads. Clock speeds also differ: the AMD part runs at 3.80 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost, while the Intel part runs at 1.90 GHz base and 4.70 GHz boost. The Intel part’s lower base clock but higher boost clock suggests a design that relies on brief high-frequency bursts.

Cache hierarchies are distinct. The AMD part has 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 16 MB L3. The Intel part has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB shared L3. The Intel part’s larger per-core L1 and L2 caches indicate a preference for feeding high-frequency cores with local data, while the AMD part’s smaller caches are offset by a lower core count.

Memory support diverges by generation. The AMD part uses DDR4 with dual-channel memory and a bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. The Intel part uses DDR5 and LPDDR5X with dual-channel memory and a bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The Intel part’s memory bandwidth is more than double the AMD part’s, which directly impacts workloads that stream large datasets.

PCIe support also differs. The AMD part uses PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Intel part uses PCIe Gen 5 with 12 lanes from the CPU. The Intel part’s newer PCIe standard offers higher per-lane bandwidth, though the AMD part has more total lanes. Integrated graphics differ as well: the AMD part uses Radeon Graphics with 512 shader processors, while the Intel part uses Intel Xe3 Graphics. No benchmark scores for either integrated GPU are recorded.

The AMD part is unlocked for multiplier adjustment, while the Intel part is locked. The AMD part fits AMD Socket AM4 and the Intel part fits Intel BGA 2540, reflecting desktop versus mobile form factors. The AMD part’s market segment is desktop, while the Intel part’s is mobile. The AMD part was released on 2025-02-23, and the Intel part was released on 2026-01-04. Neither part supports ECC memory.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The AMD Ryzen 7 5705G has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The AMD Ryzen 7 5705G supports DDR4 with a bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H scores 41215 on average. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 scores 41208 with a 0% delta. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H scores 41263 with a -0.1% delta. The AMD Ryzen 9 5900X scores 41376 with a -0.4% delta. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H scores 40967 with a 0.6% delta.

Q: What is the TDP of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 5705G has a TDP of 65 W. The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H has a TDP of 25 W.

Q: Which processor uses a smaller process node?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H uses a 3 nm process at Intel. The AMD Ryzen 7 5705G uses a 7 nm process at TSMC.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: Neither processor supports ECC memory. Both are recorded as having ECC memory set to false.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H wins in all measured benchmark categories, simply because the database contains no benchmark results for the AMD Ryzen 7 5705G. The Intel part’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 18395 and Passmark multi-thread score of 33978 are the only verified performance data points. Its 87th percentile ranking versus all CPUs confirms that it outperforms the vast majority of recorded processors.

The Intel part also wins on memory bandwidth, with 115.2 GB/s versus the AMD part’s 51.2 GB/s. This advantage matters for data-intensive workloads such as compression, where the Intel part scores 336177 in Passmark data compression, and encryption, where it scores 26345. The floating point math score of 103128 and integer math score of 83111 further indicate strong arithmetic throughput.

The AMD Ryzen 7 5705G wins on socket compatibility and overclocking flexibility. It uses AMD Socket AM4, a widely established desktop platform, and has an unlocked multiplier. The Intel part uses Intel BGA 2540, which is a soldered mobile socket, and has a locked multiplier. The AMD part’s 65 W TDP allows for higher sustained power draw in desktop cooling environments, while the Intel part’s 25 W TDP suits thin-and-light mobile designs.

The AMD part also wins on PCIe lane count, with 16 lanes versus the Intel part’s 12 lanes, though the Intel part uses PCIe Gen 5 versus the AMD part’s Gen 3. The AMD part’s higher base clock of 3.80 GHz versus the Intel part’s 1.90 GHz suggests an advantage in latency-sensitive single-threaded workloads, but without recorded single-core benchmarks for the AMD part, this remains an inference from specifications.

In practical terms, the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H is the choice for any workload where the database has measured performance. The AMD Ryzen 7 5705G is the choice for desktop builders who prioritize an established socket, overclocking headroom, and a simpler memory ecosystem. The data does not support a performance win for the AMD part, as none of its benchmark scores exist in the database.