AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D vs Intel Core Ultra 5 338H Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data splits sharply between these two processors. The AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D wins 14 of the 15 head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H takes a single narrow victory. That split defines the practical use cases.

The AMD part dominates multi-threaded and compute-heavy workloads. Cinebench R23 multicore shows 22807 points against 16331, a 39.7% lead. PassMark integer math delivers 123140 versus 64934, an 89.6% gap, the largest margin in the entire comparison. Data compression, extended instructions, prime number finding, physics, multithread, and random string sorting all go to AMD by margins ranging from 7% to 71.6%. This is a processor built for rendering, compilation, scientific computation, and any workload that scales across cores.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H wins only PassMark floating point math, scoring 84067 against 81998, a 2.5% advantage. That single result indicates an edge in floating-point-heavy code, but the margin is small and isolated. For the rest of the floating-point-adjacent workloads, AMD holds the lead, so the Intel win appears workload-specific rather than a general trend.

Single-thread performance also favors AMD. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 343 versus 305, a 12.5% lead, and Cinebench R23 single-core shows 2228 versus 2044, a 9% lead. PassMark single-thread confirms the pattern at 4704 versus 4180, again 12.5%. For lightly threaded applications, the AMD chip responds faster.

The overall percentile placement reflects this: the Ryzen 7 9850X3D sits at the 92nd percentile across all CPUs in the database, while the Core Ultra 5 338H sits at the 84th. The average benchmark score for AMD is 58386, nearly double the Intel part's 33989. The nearest rivals for each chip reinforce the positioning: AMD's closest competitors are the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M, Intel Xeon w5-2545, Intel Core i9-14900, and AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 470, all within 0.7% of its average score. Intel's closest rivals are the Core Ultra 7 165H, Core i7-12800XH, Xeon 6353P, and AMD EPYC 4244P, all within 0.7% of its average. The two chips occupy different performance tiers entirely.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies and manufacturing approaches. AMD uses the Zen 5 architecture on the Granite Ridge codename, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. Intel uses the Panther Lake architecture, also its codename, built on a 3 nm process at Intel's own foundry. Both are active production parts, but they target different market segments: AMD is a desktop processor on Socket AM5, while Intel is a mobile processor on BGA 2540.

Core configuration differs substantially. AMD packs 8 cores and 16 threads, relying on simultaneous multithreading. Intel provides 12 cores but only 12 threads, meaning no multithreading. Despite having 50% more physical cores, Intel cannot match AMD's thread count, and the benchmark results reflect that AMD's 16 threads scale better across multi-core tests.

Cache hierarchies diverge sharply. AMD gives 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 96 MB of shared L3 cache. Intel provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, but only 18 MB of shared L3. The 96 MB L3 on the AMD part is a massive advantage for workloads that fit within cache, particularly data compression and encryption tasks where the database shows 71.6% and 7% leads respectively.

Memory support differs. AMD uses DDR5 with dual-channel access and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, plus ECC memory support. Intel uses LPDDR5X with dual-channel access and 136.5 GB/s bandwidth, but no ECC support. The higher bandwidth on Intel does not translate into benchmark wins, as the AMD part's larger cache compensates for the lower memory bandwidth.

PCIe connectivity also differs. AMD provides Gen 5 with 24 lanes from the CPU, while Intel provides Gen 5 with only 4 lanes from the CPU. For a desktop build with multiple expansion cards, storage devices, or GPUs, AMD offers far more headroom. Intel's 4 lanes suit an integrated mobile platform where most devices connect through the chipset.

Clock speeds favor AMD in raw numbers. The base clock is 4.70 GHz versus 1.90 GHz, and the boost clock is 5.60 GHz versus 4.70 GHz. Thermal design power reflects the market split: AMD is rated at 120 W, Intel at 25 W. The Intel part is designed for battery and thermal constraints, while AMD targets sustained desktop performance. AMD also has an unlocked multiplier, Intel does not.

The integrated graphics differ as well. AMD includes Radeon Graphics, Intel includes Arc B370. Neither part's iGPU is benchmarked in the database, so no performance comparison is possible from the recorded data.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single win for AMD comes in PassMark integer math. The Ryzen 7 9850X3D scores 123140 against 64934, an 89.6% lead. That result drives the overall average score differential and indicates strong ALU throughput for integer-heavy code.

Data compression shows a 71.6% advantage, with 474501 versus 276539. This is a clear indicator for archiving, backup, and database workloads that compress data in memory. The 96 MB L3 cache on AMD likely plays a role here, keeping working sets resident.

Extended instructions show 39272 versus 23906, a 64.3% lead. This covers SIMD-heavy operations, and AMD's lead is substantial. Physics simulation shows 4171 versus 2697, a 54.7% lead, relevant for gaming physics and scientific simulation.

Random string sorting shows 49764 versus 34082, a 46% lead. PassMark multithread shows 41318 versus 28717, a 43.9% lead. Prime number finding shows 435 versus 304, a 43.1% lead. Cinebench R15 multicore shows 3551 versus 2504, a 41.8% lead, and Cinebench R23 multicore shows 22807 versus 16331, a 39.7% lead.

The single-thread results are closer. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 2228 versus 2044, a 9% lead. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 343 versus 305, a 12.5% lead, matching the PassMark single-thread margin of 4704 versus 4180, also 12.5%. Data encryption shows the narrowest AMD win at 22856 versus 21367, just 7%.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H takes PassMark floating point math with 84067 against 81998, a 2.5% edge. This is the only test where Intel wins, and the margin is small. For a single workload type that relies heavily on FPU throughput, Intel shows a measurable advantage, but it does not offset the broader multi-core deficit.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has 12 cores but only 12 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D has 8 cores and 16 threads. Despite Intel's higher core count, AMD matches and exceeds it in thread count, which matters for multi-threaded workloads.

Q: What is the largest benchmark margin between the two?

A: PassMark integer math shows the biggest gap. AMD scores 123140 versus Intel's 64934, a 89.6% difference in favor of the Ryzen 7 9850X3D.

Q: Does the Intel chip win any benchmark?

A: Yes, Intel wins PassMark floating point math with a score of 84067 against AMD's 81998, a 2.5% advantage. This is the only head-to-head test where Intel comes out ahead.

Q: How do the cache sizes compare?

A: AMD provides 96 MB of shared L3 cache, while Intel provides 18 MB of shared L3 cache. Intel has larger per-core L1 and L2 caches, 192 KB and 2.5 MB respectively, versus AMD's 80 KB and 1 MB, but the total L3 advantage heavily favors AMD.

Q: Which processor is designed for desktop use?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D is a desktop processor on AMD Socket AM5. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H is a mobile processor on Intel BGA 2540.

Q: What are the thermal design power ratings?

A: AMD is rated at 120 W, Intel at 25 W. The Intel part is built for mobile power constraints, while AMD targets sustained desktop performance.

Specification Differences

• Cores: AMD 8, Intel 12
• Threads: AMD 16, Intel 12
• Base clock: AMD 4.70 GHz, Intel 1.90 GHz
• Boost clock: AMD 5.60 GHz, Intel 4.70 GHz
• TDP: AMD 120 W, Intel 25 W
• Socket: AMD Socket AM5, Intel BGA 2540
• Architecture: AMD Zen 5, Intel Panther Lake
• Process node: AMD 4 nm, Intel 3 nm
• Foundry: AMD TSMC, Intel Intel
• L1 cache: AMD 80 KB per core, Intel 192 KB per core
• L2 cache: AMD 1 MB per core, Intel 2.5 MB per core
• L3 cache: AMD 96 MB shared, Intel 18 MB shared
• Memory support: AMD DDR5, Intel LPDDR5X
• Memory bandwidth: AMD 89.6 GB/s, Intel 136.5 GB/s
• ECC memory: AMD yes, Intel no
• PCIe: AMD Gen 5 24 lanes, Intel Gen 5 4 lanes
• Integrated graphics: AMD Radeon Graphics, Intel Arc B370
• Market segment: AMD Desktop, Intel Mobile
• Unlocked multiplier: AMD yes, Intel no
• Release date: AMD 2026-01-28, Intel 2026-01-04
• Launch MSRP: AMD $499, Intel not available

The Verdict

The data points to a clear performance hierarchy. The AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D wins 14 of 15 benchmarks and holds a 92nd percentile ranking versus Intel's 84th. The average benchmark score of 58386 versus 33989 is a 71.7% gap, and the nearest rivals for each chip do not overlap in performance tier.

For a desktop builder focused on rendering, compilation, scientific computing, data compression, or any multi-threaded workload, the AMD part is the stronger choice. The 89.6% lead in integer math, 71.6% lead in data compression, and 39.7% lead in Cinebench R23 multicore are decisive. The 96 MB L3 cache and 16 threads provide headroom that the Intel part cannot match.

For a mobile user prioritizing power efficiency, the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H operates at 25 W versus 120 W, and its 3 nm process at Intel's foundry targets battery life and thermal constraints. The single floating point math win at 2.5% is real but narrow. The Intel part fits a thin-and-light laptop where the AMD desktop part cannot physically be installed.

The specification differences reinforce the market separation. AMD offers ECC memory support, an unlocked multiplier, 24 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, and a $499 launch MSRP. Intel offers higher memory bandwidth at 136.5 GB/s, a larger physical core count, and no MSRP listed. Neither part replaces the other; they serve different machines. The benchmark data shows that for raw compute performance, the AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D is the dominant part, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H is the mobile alternative with a single narrow strength in floating point math.