AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D vs Intel Core Ultra 5 338H Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits these two processors along clear lines of workload type. The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D wins 14 of the 15 recorded head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H takes a single victory. The AMD part dominates in nearly every category that stresses sustained throughput, integer work, and multi-threaded rendering. The Intel part claims only one win, in floating-point math, where it delivers a score of 84067 against the AMD part's 79456, a 5.5% margin.

The AMD processor's strongest categories are integer math, data compression, and extended instructions. In PassMark integer math, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D scores 116709 against the Intel part's 64934, a 79.7% advantage. Data compression shows a 69.2% gap, with the AMD part scoring 468017 versus 276539. Extended instructions follow at 62.3% ahead, with scores of 38808 and 23906. These are not marginal differences; they represent a full performance class separation in compute-heavy integer workloads.

Multi-threaded rendering also favors the AMD chip substantially. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D scores 23230 against 16331, a 42.2% lead. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a 45.6% gap (3647 versus 2504). PassMark multi-thread confirms the pattern with 40009 versus 28717, a 39.3% difference. Physics simulation, another heavily multi-threaded workload, shows a 51.4% advantage for the AMD part (4083 versus 2697).

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H does not win any multi-threaded test in the recorded data. Its single victory in floating-point math is the only recorded benchmark where it surpasses the AMD part. The Intel chip also comes close in single-core tests. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the AMD part leads by only 1.8% (2080 versus 2044). Cinebench R15 single-core shows a 7.5% gap (328 versus 305), and PassMark single-thread shows a 6% gap (4430 versus 4180). These are the narrowest margins in the entire comparison, indicating that the two chips have comparable single-thread capability despite the AMD part's larger overall lead.

Data encryption is another near-miss for Intel. The AMD part scores 22158 versus 21367, a 3.7% advantage. This is the second-smallest gap after the Cinebench R23 single-core result. The overall pattern is clear: the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D wins decisively in multi-threaded and integer-heavy tasks, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has a narrow edge in floating-point math and remains competitive in single-thread tests.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D has an average benchmark score of 39768, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has an average of 33989.

Q: How do the two processors compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D scores 23230, which is 42.2% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H's 16331.

Q: Is there any benchmark where the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H wins?

A: Yes, in PassMark floating-point math, the Intel part scores 84067 against the AMD part's 79456, a 5.5% advantage.

Q: How close are the two in single-thread performance?

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, the AMD part leads by 1.8% (2080 versus 2044). In PassMark single-thread, the AMD part leads by 6% (4430 versus 4180).

Q: What is the percentile ranking of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D ranks in the 87th percentile among all CPUs. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H ranks in the 84th percentile.

Q: What memory types do the two processors support?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D supports DDR5 memory. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H supports LPDDR5X memory.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single win for the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D comes in PassMark integer math, where it scores 116709 against the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H's 64934. The 79.7% delta is the biggest gap in the entire head-to-head table. This test measures raw integer computation, and the AMD part's 8 cores with 16 threads clearly outperform the Intel part's 12 cores with 12 threads in this specific workload.

Data compression shows the second-largest gap at 69.2%. The AMD part scores 468017, while the Intel part scores 276539. This test benefits from the AMD part's large shared L3 cache and high per-core throughput. Extended instructions follow at 62.3% (38808 versus 23906), indicating that the AMD architecture handles complex instruction sequences more efficiently.

The multi-threaded rendering tests show consistent leads of roughly 40-45%. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a 42.2% gap (23230 versus 16331), while Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a 45.6% gap (3647 versus 2504). PassMark multi-thread shows a 39.3% gap (40009 versus 28717), and PassMark physics shows a 51.4% gap (4083 versus 2697). Random string sorting rounds out the multi-threaded category with a 42.4% gap (48526 versus 34082).

Prime number finding, a test that stresses both integer throughput and memory access patterns, shows a 39.1% gap. The AMD part scores 423, while the Intel part scores 304. The AMD part's 96 MB shared L3 cache likely contributes to this result, as the workload benefits from fast access to large datasets.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H's single win in floating-point math is notable because it is the only test where the Intel part leads. The score of 84067 versus 79456 represents a 5.5% advantage. This suggests that the Intel architecture has a specific strength in floating-point operations, even though it lags in most other categories.

The closest margins are in single-thread tests. Cinebench R23 single-core shows only a 1.8% gap (2080 versus 2044). PassMark single-thread shows a 6% gap (4430 versus 4180), and Cinebench R15 single-core shows a 7.5% gap (328 versus 305). Data encryption is also close at 3.7% (22158 versus 21367). These narrow gaps suggest that for lightly threaded workloads, the two processors are nearly equivalent.

Specification Differences

The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D uses 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H uses 12 cores and 12 threads. The Intel part has more physical cores but no hyper-threading, giving it fewer total threads. The AMD part compensates with simultaneous multi-threading, doubling its thread count.

Base clocks differ substantially. The AMD part runs at 4.70 GHz base and 5.20 GHz boost. The Intel part runs at 1.90 GHz base and 4.70 GHz boost. The AMD part has a 2.80 GHz higher base clock and a 0.50 GHz higher boost clock. Power consumption also differs: the AMD part has a 120 W TDP, while the Intel part has a 25 W TDP, reflecting their different market segments.

The socket and form factor differ completely. The AMD processor uses AMD Socket AM5 and is a desktop part. The Intel processor uses Intel BGA 2540 and is a mobile part. This means the two are not interchangeable in any system.

Memory support differs. The AMD part supports DDR5 memory, while the Intel part supports LPDDR5X. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the memory bandwidth figures differ: the AMD part has 89.6 GB/s, while the Intel part has 136.5 GB/s. The Intel part supports ECC memory, while the AMD part does not.

PCIe lane counts differ significantly. The AMD part has Gen 5 with 24 lanes (CPU only). The Intel part has Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics also differ: the AMD part uses Radeon Graphics, while the Intel part uses Arc B370.

The AMD part has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel part does not. The AMD processor's part number is 100-000001084, while the Intel processor's part number is SA4REQ9EW. The AMD processor was released earlier and has a launch MSRP of $479. The Intel processor has no recorded launch MSRP in the database. The AMD part has a production status of Active, and the Intel part also has a production status of Active.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D is built on the Zen 5 architecture with the Granite Ridge codename, part of the 9000 series. It uses a 4 nm process node from TSMC and contains 8,315 million transistors on a 70.6 mm² die. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H uses the Panther Lake architecture with the same Panther Lake codename, part of the Core Ultra Series 3. It uses a 3 nm process node from Intel, with no transistor count or die size recorded in the database.

Cache structures differ substantially. The AMD part has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 96 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part's L3 cache is more than five times larger than the Intel part's, which explains its strong performance in data-heavy workloads like compression and random string sorting.

The foundries differ: AMD uses TSMC, while Intel uses its own foundry. The process nodes also differ: AMD uses 4 nm, while Intel uses 3 nm. The Intel part's smaller process node gives it a transistor density advantage in theory, though no transistor count is recorded for the Intel part to confirm this.

The market segments differ. The AMD part is a desktop processor, while the Intel part is a mobile processor. This explains the large TDP difference (120 W versus 25 W) and the socket difference (AM5 versus BGA 2540). The AMD part has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, while the Intel part does not.

The integrated graphics solutions differ: the AMD part uses Radeon Graphics, while the Intel part uses Arc B370. The Intel part's Arc B370 is likely a more capable integrated GPU given its mobile-focused design, but the database does not include graphics benchmarks for either part.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows a decisive overall advantage for the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D. It wins 14 of 15 head-to-head benchmarks and holds a 87th percentile ranking versus the Intel part's 84th percentile. The average benchmark score of 39768 versus 33989 represents a substantial gap in overall performance.

The AMD part is the clear choice for multi-threaded workloads. Its leads of 42.2% in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 45.6% in Cinebench R15 multi-core, and 39.3% in PassMark multi-thread indicate that it delivers roughly 40% more throughput in heavily threaded rendering and compute tasks. The 79.7% lead in integer math and 69.2% lead in data compression further confirm its strength in integer-heavy applications.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has a narrower set of advantages. Its 5.5% lead in floating-point math is the only recorded win. It comes close in single-thread tests, with gaps of only 1.8% in Cinebench R23 single-core and 6% in PassMark single-thread. Its 136.5 GB/s memory bandwidth exceeds the AMD part's 89.6 GB/s, which may benefit certain memory-bound workloads, though the benchmark data does not show a corresponding performance advantage.

For desktop users seeking maximum multi-threaded performance and strong single-thread capability, the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D is the better choice based on the recorded data. For mobile users who need a lower-power processor with competitive single-thread performance and a floating-point advantage, the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H offers a different trade-off. The Intel part's 25 W TDP versus the AMD part's 120 W TDP also reflects its intended use in power-constrained mobile systems, where the AMD part's higher performance would come at a much higher power cost.

The data does not support a recommendation for the Intel part in absolute performance terms. Its 84th percentile ranking and lower average score place it slightly below the AMD part in the database's overall hierarchy. The AMD part's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS (0.4% lower), AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 (0.7% higher), AMD Ryzen AI 7 450 (0.7% lower), and AMD Ryzen 7 7700 (0.8% higher). The Intel part's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H (0.3% higher), Intel Core i7-12800HX (0.3% lower), Intel Xeon 6353P (0.4% lower), and AMD EPYC 4244P (0.7% higher). These rival comparisons show that both parts sit in competitive performance tiers, but the AMD part sits higher in absolute terms.