AMD Ryzen 9 270 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 9 270 and Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus represent two very different interpretations of CPU design. The recorded data shows a decisive sweep: the Intel part wins all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The margins, however, tell a nuanced story about where the strengths lie. The Intel chip is not just faster; it is faster by a wide margin in some workloads and only moderately faster in others.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus dominates every single benchmark in the database, with the widest gaps appearing in multi-threaded and compute-heavy tasks. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel chip scores 42,718 against the Ryzen 9 270's 26,438, a delta of -38.1%. The same exact -38.1% delta applies across all six Cinebench tests (R15, R20, and R23, both single and multi-core), indicating a consistent architectural performance advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The PassMark suite reveals a more varied picture. The biggest single delta is in find prime numbers, where Intel scores 452 versus AMD's 88, a staggering -80.5% difference. This test is heavily dependent on integer throughput and instruction-level parallelism, and the Intel part crushes it. Floating point math also shows a massive gap: 159,824 versus 60,122, a -62.4% delta. Physics is similarly lopsided at -57.1% (3,183 vs 1,365).

Other deltas are smaller but still significant. Integer math shows a -20.1% gap (123,030 vs 98,266), while single-thread performance is closer at -19.5% (4,698 vs 3,784). Data encryption shows a -49.5% delta (41,292 vs 20,852), and data compression is -36.5% (553,155 vs 351,398). Random string sorting shows -36.3%, and extended instructions show -37.7%. The multi-thread PassMark score is -42% (50,146 vs 29,089). The pattern is clear: the Intel part wins everywhere, with the smallest margins in single-threaded and integer work, and the largest in specialized compute kernels.

Architecture Differences

The two CPUs are built on fundamentally different platforms. The AMD Ryzen 9 270 uses the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Hawk Point, on a 4 nm process from TSMC. It packs 25,000 million transistors into a 178 mm² die. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus uses the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture (listed as generation Ultra 5, Arrow Lake) on a 3 nm process, also from TSMC, with 17,800 million transistors on a larger 243 mm² die. Despite fewer transistors, the Intel chip delivers higher performance, suggesting better transistor utilization or architectural efficiency.

Core counts diverge sharply. The AMD part has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel part has 18 cores and 18 threads. The Intel chip has no hyper-threading, giving it 18 threads across 18 cores, whereas the AMD chip uses simultaneous multi-threading to reach 16 threads from 8 cores. The Intel part also runs at higher clocks: 4.20 GHz base and 5.30 GHz boost versus 4.00 GHz base and 5.20 GHz boost for AMD.

Cache hierarchies are radically different. AMD allocates 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3. Intel uses 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 30 MB shared L3. The Intel L3 is nearly double the AMD L3, and its per-core L2 is three times larger. This cache advantage likely contributes to the Intel part's strong performance in compression and encryption workloads.

The platforms diverge on memory and PCIe. Both support DDR5 and dual-channel memory, but Intel has higher memory bandwidth at 115.2 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s for AMD. Intel also supports ECC memory, while AMD does not. PCIe generation differs: Intel uses Gen 5 with 20 lanes, AMD uses Gen 4 with 20 lanes. The AMD part includes integrated Radeon 780M graphics, while the Intel part has no integrated graphics (N/A). The sockets are incompatible: AMD Socket FP8 for the Ryzen, Intel Socket 1851 for the Core Ultra.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the recorded data, the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus wins in every category measured. The question is whether the margins are large enough to matter for specific use cases. The smallest deltas are in single-thread performance (-19.5%) and integer math (-20.1%). These are the workloads that typically matter for everyday desktop responsiveness, office productivity, and light multitasking. The Intel part is still ahead, but the gap is less punishing.

The largest deltas appear in specialized compute: find prime numbers (-80.5%), floating point math (-62.4%), and physics (-57.1%). These are the workloads that benefit most from the Intel part's higher core count, larger caches, and higher clocks. Data encryption (-49.5%) and multi-thread workloads (-42%) also show substantial advantages for Intel. The AMD part's only theoretical advantage is its integrated graphics, which the Intel part lacks entirely, but the benchmark data does not include graphics tests, so this cannot be quantified from the database.

For workloads that are heavily parallel and memory-bandwidth sensitive, the Intel part is the clear choice. For single-threaded tasks, the Intel part is still ahead, but the margin is narrower. The AMD part's 16 threads from 8 cores may be more efficient in certain latency-sensitive workloads, but the benchmark data does not show any test where AMD wins.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 9 270 has 8 cores and 16 threads. Intel has more physical cores, but AMD uses simultaneous multi-threading to reach 16 threads from 8 cores.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest delta is in the PassMark find prime numbers test, where Intel scores 452 against AMD's 88, a -80.5% difference. This is a specialized integer workload that heavily favors the Intel architecture.

Q: How do the cache sizes compare?

A: Intel has 192 KB L1, 3 MB L2, and 30 MB L3 per core (with L3 shared). AMD has 64 KB L1, 1 MB L2, and 16 MB shared L3. Intel's L2 is three times larger per core, and its L3 is nearly double.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus supports ECC memory. The AMD Ryzen 9 270 does not support ECC memory.

Q: What is the difference in single-thread performance?

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 6,030 versus AMD's 3,732, a -38.1% delta. In PassMark single-thread, Intel scores 4,698 versus AMD's 3,784, a -19.5% delta. Intel wins both tests.

Q: Which CPU has integrated graphics?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 270 includes Radeon 780M integrated graphics. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has no integrated graphics (listed as N/A).

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 9 270 | Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus |

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

| Cores | 8 | 18 |

| Threads | 16 | 18 |

| Base Clock | 4.00 GHz | 4.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.20 GHz | 5.30 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 125 W |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Transistors | 25,000 million | 17,800 million |

| Die Size | 178 mm² | 243 mm² |

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

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

| L3 Cache | 16 MB (shared) | 30 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 115.2 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes | Gen 5, 20 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 780M | N/A |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

The Verdict

The database shows the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus as the unequivocally faster processor across all 17 benchmark tests. Its average benchmark score is 66,159 versus AMD's 40,246, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs compared to AMD's 87th percentile. The Intel part sits alongside the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D in its nearest rivals, with a delta of only 0.4%, while the AMD Ryzen 9 270 is closer to the Intel Core i9-13905H at -0.2%.

For multi-threaded rendering, scientific computing, and any workload that uses floating point or prime number calculations, the Intel part delivers between 38% and 80% more performance. The 125 W TDP and 18 physical cores suggest a desktop-focused design that prioritizes throughput over efficiency. The AMD part, with its 45 W TDP and mobile socket, is designed for a different class of system entirely, yet it still trails in every measured metric.

The only scenario where the AMD Ryzen 9 270 makes sense is when the integrated Radeon 780M graphics are required, since the Intel part has no iGPU. The database does not provide graphics benchmarks, so that advantage cannot be quantified here. For pure CPU workloads, the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is the faster part, and the data shows no workload where the AMD chip closes the gap meaningfully. The Intel part's launch MSRP is $184, while the AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP.