AMD Ryzen 7 5800 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 125H Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800 and Intel Core Ultra 5 125H are statistical near-twins in aggregate performance, separated by a mere 0.1% in average benchmark score, yet they achieve this parity through entirely different means. The Ryzen 7 5800 dominates in raw multi-threaded and single-threaded compute workloads, winning 13 of 17 head-to-head comparisons, while the Core Ultra 5 125H counters with a narrow victory in floating-point math and a decisive win in physics simulations. The data indicates a clear split: the desktop-class Ryzen 7 5800 is the choice for processor-heavy tasks like rendering and encryption, whereas the mobile-oriented Core Ultra 5 125H offers a more balanced package with integrated graphics and lower power draw, making it suited for portable systems where the Ryzen's performance advantages are less critical.

The Verdict

Pick the AMD Ryzen 7 5800 if your priority is maximum compute throughput in a desktop socket. Benchmark results show it leads the Core Ultra 5 125H by 71.4% in Cinebench R23 multi-core (21953 vs 12804.5) and by 88.1% in the same test's single-core run (3099 vs 1647.5). It also wins 13 of 17 direct comparisons, including decisive margins in integer math (32.7% ahead), data encryption (40.5% ahead), and extended instructions (54.9% ahead). For users running CPU-bound desktop workloads, the choice is unambiguous.

Pick the Intel Core Ultra 5 125H if you need a mobile processor with a lower 28W TDP and integrated Arc Xe-LPG 96EU graphics, which the Ryzen 7 5800 lacks entirely. While it loses most compute benchmarks, the Core Ultra 5 125H wins in physics simulation by 20.7% (1439 vs 1141) and edges out the Ryzen in single-thread PassMark tests by a tiny 0.2% margin (3399 vs 3393). Its 14 cores and 18 threads at a 28W TDP make it a power-efficient option for laptops, whereas the Ryzen 7 5800's 65W TDP and desktop socket (AM4) restrict it to wall-powered systems.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 7 5800 is built on the Zen 3 architecture (codename Vermeer) using a 7 nm process from TSMC, featuring 8 cores and 16 threads. It utilizes a classic monolithic design with 4,150 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. Its cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a shared 32 MB L3 pool, which is double the L3 available on the Intel part.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 125H uses the Meteor Lake architecture, also on a 7 nm node but fabricated by Intel itself. It employs a hybrid core layout with 14 cores and 18 threads, a configuration that combines performance and efficiency cores. Its cache is organized differently: 112 KB of L1 per core and a much larger 2 MB of L2 per core, but only 18 MB of shared L3. The Intel part also supports DDR5 memory (dependent on motherboard) with a higher theoretical memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s compared to the Ryzen's DDR4 support at 51.2 GB/s. The Core Ultra 5 125H includes integrated Arc Xe-LPG 96EU graphics, a feature absent from the Ryzen 7 5800, and supports PCIe Gen 5, while the Ryzen offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest performance disparity appears in Cinebench R23. The Ryzen 7 5800 scores 21953 in multi-core versus 12804.5 for the Core Ultra 5 125H, a 71.4% advantage. The single-core gap is even more pronounced at 88.1%, with scores of 3099 and 1647.5 respectively. This suggests the Ryzen's Zen 3 cores have a significant per-thread performance lead over the Intel hybrid architecture's efficiency cores.

In Cinebench R20, the Ryzen maintains a 28.8% lead in both multi-core (9220 vs 7161) and single-core (1301 vs 1010) tests. The R15 results show a narrower 9.4% multi-core margin (2212 vs 2021.5) but a huge 29.5% single-core lead (312 vs 241). PassMark results follow a similar pattern: the Ryzen wins data compression by 34% (316429 vs 236209), data encryption by 40.5% (20021 vs 14251), and extended instructions by 54.9% (21297 vs 13749). Integer math favors the Ryzen at 92843 versus 69986, a 32.7% gap.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 125H's wins are narrower but notable. In PassMark floating-point math, it posts 51670 versus 51588, a marginal 0.2% victory. The physics test is its strongest showing: 1439 versus 1141, a 20.7% advantage for Intel. The PassMark single-thread tests are essentially tied, with Intel scoring 3399 against AMD's 3393, a 0.2% difference.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 5800 has a marginally higher average benchmark score of 27535 compared to the Intel Core Ultra 5 125H's 27507, a difference of 0.1%.

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 5 125H have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it includes Arc Xe-LPG 96EU integrated graphics. The AMD Ryzen 7 5800 has no integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU.

Q: Which CPU supports faster memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 125H supports DDR5 memory with a maximum bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the AMD Ryzen 7 5800 supports DDR4 with a bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s.

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

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 5800 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 125H has 14 cores and 18 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 5800 has a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, which is higher than the Intel Core Ultra 5 125H's 4.50 GHz boost clock.

Q: In which benchmark does the Intel Core Ultra 5 125H have its largest margin of victory?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 125H wins the PassMark physics test by 20.7%, scoring 1439 against the AMD Ryzen 7 5800's 1141.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800 wins in every multi-threaded compute scenario except physics simulation. It is the clear choice for video rendering, as indicated by its 71.4% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core. Its 40.5% advantage in data encryption and 54.9% lead in extended instructions point to strengths in security-related tasks and AVX-512 or similar workloads. The 32.7% win in integer math and 34% lead in data compression also make it better suited for general productivity, database operations, and file archiving. Its single-core dominance (88.1% in Cinebench R23 single-core) also gives it an edge in lightly-threaded applications like legacy software or basic web browsing, though the real-world difference is less pronounced in everyday use.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 125H wins in physics simulation by 20.7%, suggesting an advantage in game physics calculations or scientific simulation workloads that rely on specific instruction paths. Its near-tie in floating-point math (0.2% lead) and single-thread PassMark (0.2% lead) indicate competitive performance in scientific computing or financial modeling. The integrated Arc Xe-LPG 96EU graphics means it can handle basic display output and light graphics tasks without a discrete GPU, which is a functional win for mobile systems. Its lower 28W TDP versus 65W also makes it the only option for battery-powered devices, even if that comes at the cost of significant multi-core performance.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 7 5800 | Intel Core Ultra 5 125H |

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

| Series | 5000 series | Core Ultra Series 1 |

| Cores | 8 | 14 |

| Threads | 16 | 18 |

| Base Clock | 3.40 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.60 GHz | 4.50 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 28 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM4 | Intel BGA 2049 |

| Architecture | Zen 3 | Meteor Lake |

| Codename | Vermeer | Meteor Lake |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 4,150 million | Not specified |

| Die Size | 74 mm² | Not specified |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 112 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 512 KB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 32 MB (shared) | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR5 (depends on motherboard) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | 89.6 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

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

| Integrated Graphics | None | Arc Xe-LPG 96EU |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2021-01-11 | 2023-12-13 |

| Launch MSRP | Not specified | $375 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Part Number | 100-000000456 | SRMZ4 |