AMD Ryzen 9 270 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 366H Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H and AMD Ryzen 9 270 are both mobile processors aimed at high-performance laptops, and the recorded data places them in the same performance percentile (87th) among all CPUs. The Intel part posts an average benchmark score of 41263, while the AMD part averages 40246, a difference of roughly 2.5% in favor of Intel. Across 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, Intel wins 14 and AMD wins 3, but the margins vary widely depending on the workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most lopsided result in the entire comparison is the Passmark find prime numbers test, where the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H scores 326 against the AMD Ryzen 9 270's 88, a 270.5% advantage. This is a massive gap and indicates a fundamental difference in how the two architectures handle integer-heavy, branch-intensive algorithms. Similarly, in the Passmark physics test, Intel scores 2880 versus AMD's 1365, a 111% lead. Floating point math also favors Intel heavily: 103615 versus 60122, a 72.3% difference. These three tests alone show that Intel's compute throughput in certain specialized workloads is far ahead.

In the Cinebench suite, Intel wins every single test by a consistent 7.7% margin. For example, in Cinebench R23 multicore, Intel scores 28477 and AMD scores 26438; in single core, Intel scores 4020 and AMD scores 3732. The same 7.7% delta appears in R15 and R20, both multicore and single core. This uniformity suggests a steady architectural advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk. The Passmark multithread test also goes to Intel, 33429 versus 29089, a 14.9% lead, and the single-thread test shows Intel at 4043 versus 3784, a 6.8% edge. Data encryption is another Intel win, 25845 versus 20852, a 23.9% margin. Extended instructions are nearly tied, with Intel ahead by just 0.6% (26901 versus 26729).

AMD's three wins are all in Passmark subtests. The largest is integer math, where AMD scores 98266 against Intel's 83695, a 14.8% advantage. Data compression also favors AMD, 351398 versus 327455, a 6.8% lead. Random string sorting goes to AMD as well, 42819 versus 39814, a 7% margin. These are the only areas where AMD outperforms Intel, and they are all specific to integer and memory-access patterns rather than general compute.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly into two categories. Intel dominates in rendering and general-purpose compute: all Cinebench tests, multithread, single thread, encryption, floating point math, physics, and prime number finding. This makes the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H the stronger choice for 3D rendering, video encoding, scientific simulations, and any workload that relies on heavy arithmetic or parallel processing. The 7.7% lead in Cinebench across the board is particularly relevant for content creators who use CPU-based rendering.

AMD's wins are concentrated in integer math, data compression, and random string sorting. These tasks are common in file archiving, database operations, and certain types of data processing. The 14.8% lead in integer math suggests that AMD's Zen 4 cores handle integer-heavy code more efficiently, even though Intel's overall multithread score is higher. For users who primarily compress large files or run integer-bound server-like workloads, the AMD Ryzen 9 270 would be the better fit. However, these are niche use cases compared to the broad compute advantage Intel shows.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies. Intel uses a 3 nm process node fabricated in-house, while AMD uses a 4 nm node from TSMC. Intel's architecture is Panther Lake, a newer design, while AMD's is Zen 4 under the Hawk Point codename. The core counts differ significantly: Intel has 16 cores and 16 threads, while AMD has 8 cores and 16 threads. This means Intel relies on more physical cores, while AMD uses simultaneous multithreading to reach 16 threads from 8 cores.

Clock speeds tell a different story. AMD has a much higher base clock of 4.00 GHz versus Intel's 2.00 GHz, and a higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz versus 4.80 GHz. Despite this, Intel still wins most benchmarks, indicating that its higher core count and newer architecture compensate for lower clocks. The TDP also differs: Intel is rated at 25W, AMD at 45W, which suggests Intel may be more power-efficient per unit of performance, though the database does not include power consumption measurements.

Cache hierarchies are distinct. Intel provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. AMD provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. Intel's larger per-core caches likely contribute to its strong single-thread and physics results. Memory bandwidth also favors Intel: 115.2 GB/s versus AMD's 89.6 GB/s, both on dual-channel memory. Intel supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while AMD supports only DDR5. PCIe connectivity differs as well: Intel offers Gen 5 with 12 CPU lanes, while AMD offers Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics are Intel Xe3 versus AMD Radeon 780M, though no graphics benchmarks are in the data.

Other differences include the socket (Intel BGA 2540 versus AMD Socket FP8), the foundry (Intel versus TSMC), and the release date (Intel January 2026, AMD January 2025). AMD lists 25,000 million transistors and a 178 mm² die size, while Intel does not provide those figures. Both are mobile parts, active in production, and have locked multipliers.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded benchmarks, the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H is the superior processor for the vast majority of workloads. It wins 14 of 17 head-to-head tests, including every Cinebench test, all major Passmark compute tests, and the multithread and single-thread metrics. Its average benchmark score is 41263 versus 40246, and it holds a 7.7% lead in rendering tasks. The only areas where AMD wins are integer math, data compression, and random string sorting, which are specific to data-processing and archiving scenarios.

Users who need maximum performance in rendering, scientific computing, encryption, or general multitasking should choose the Intel part. Its higher core count, larger caches, and higher memory bandwidth give it a clear edge. Users who work primarily with compression tools or integer-heavy database workloads might prefer the AMD Ryzen 9 270, but that is a narrow use case. The data does not support AMD as a general-purpose winner. Both CPUs sit at the 87th percentile, but Intel's average score is higher, and its win count is decisive.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has higher single-thread performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H scores 4043 in Passmark single-thread and 4020 in Cinebench R23 single core, while the AMD Ryzen 9 270 scores 3784 and 3732 respectively. Intel leads by 6.8% in both tests.

Q: How do they compare in multi-threaded rendering?

A: Intel wins all Cinebench multicore tests by 7.7%. For example, in Cinebench R23 multicore, Intel scores 28477 versus AMD's 26438.

Q: Which CPU has more cores?

A: Intel has 16 cores, while AMD has 8 cores. Both have 16 threads, but Intel uses physical cores while AMD uses simultaneous multithreading.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between them?

A: The largest gap is in Passmark find prime numbers, where Intel scores 326 versus AMD's 88, a 270.5% advantage. Intel also leads by 111% in physics and 72.3% in floating point math.

Q: In which tests does AMD win?

A: AMD wins three Passmark subtests: integer math (98266 versus 83695, a 14.8% lead), data compression (351398 versus 327455, a 6.8% lead), and random string sorting (42819 versus 39814, a 7% lead).

Q: What are the memory bandwidth differences?

A: Intel supports 115.2 GB/s, while AMD supports 89.6 GB/s, both on dual-channel memory. Intel also supports LPDDR5X in addition to DDR5, while AMD supports only DDR5.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Core Ultra 7 366H | AMD Ryzen 9 270 |

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

| Cores | 16 | 8 |

| Base clock | 2.00 GHz | 4.00 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.80 GHz | 5.20 GHz |

| TDP | 25 W | 45 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 2540 | AMD Socket FP8 |

| Architecture | Panther Lake | Zen 4 (Hawk Point) |

| Process node | 3 nm | 4 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not listed | 25,000 million |

| Die size | Not listed | 178 mm² |

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

| L2 cache (per core) | 2.5 MB | 1 MB |

| L3 cache (shared) | 18 MB | 16 MB |

| Memory support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR5 |

| Memory bandwidth | 115.2 GB/s | 89.6 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 12 lanes (CPU) | Gen 4, 20 lanes (CPU) |

| Integrated graphics | Intel Xe3 Graphics | Radeon 780M |

| Release date | 2026-01-04 | 2025-01-05 |

| Part number | SA4R9Q9EL | 100-000001836 |

Both processors share the same thread count (16), dual-channel memory bus, lack of ECC support, mobile market segment, active production status, and locked multiplier. Neither has a launch MSRP listed in the database.