AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225T Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data leaves no ambiguity: the AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX wins every single head-to-head benchmark, 11 wins to 0. The largest margins appear in integer math, data compression, extended instructions, and random string sorting, where the AMD part leads by 190.5%, 183.1%, 168%, and 143.9%, respectively. These are not narrow advantages; they represent workloads where the Ryzen 9 9850HX more than doubles the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T's output.

In integer math, the AMD scores 172943 against Intel's 59543, a delta of 190.5%. Data compression shows 662381 versus 233998, a 183.1% gap. Extended instructions deliver 53817 versus 20083, up 168%. Random string sorting completes at 70175 versus 28774, a 143.9% lead. Multithread performance follows the same pattern: 51722 versus 25358, a 104% advantage. The AMD processor doubles the Intel chip in raw multi-threaded throughput, which aligns with its 12 cores and 24 threads versus 10 cores and 10 threads.

Floating point math shows a 39% lead (115062 versus 82751), and physics simulation shows a 48.8% lead (3054 versus 2053). Data encryption is 75.7% ahead (32139 versus 18289). Find prime numbers, the tightest absolute race, still favors AMD by 13.7% (323 versus 284). The single-thread results are the closest of all: 4461 versus 4348, a 2.6% edge for the Ryzen 9 9850HX. Even where the Intel part's architecture is strongest, it cannot overtake the AMD chip.

The average benchmark score tells the broader story. The Ryzen 9 9850HX records an average of 106413, while the Core Ultra 5 225T averages 30468. The AMD processor sits at the 97th percentile among all CPUs in the database; the Intel sits at the 82nd. The closest rivals to the AMD chip are the Intel Xeon w7-3555 (0.2% lower average), Intel Xeon 6521P (0.5% lower), Intel Xeon w7-2595X (2.1% higher), and AMD EPYC 8324P (3% lower). The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T's nearest rivals are the Intel Core i9-11980HK (0.2% higher), AMD Ryzen 5 7640HS (0.3% lower), Intel Core i5-13600H (0.3% higher), and AMD Ryzen 7 7736U (0.3% lower). These rival sets show the Ryzen 9 9850HX competing with workstation-class Xeons, while the Core Ultra 5 225T competes with mid-range mobile and desktop parts.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX uses the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Fire Range, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It packs 12 cores and 24 threads with a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T uses Arrow Lake, built on a 3 nm process at TSMC, with 10 cores and 10 threads, a base clock of 2.50 GHz, and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The AMD part draws 55 W TDP; the Intel part draws 65 W. The AMD chip ships with an unlocked multiplier; the Intel chip is locked.

Cache organization differs sharply. The AMD processor provides 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 64 MB L3. The Intel processor provides 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 20 MB shared L3. The Intel part has more per-core L1 and L2, but the AMD part has more than three times the total L3 capacity, which contributes to its multithreaded dominance.

Transistor counts are close: 16,630 million for AMD versus 17,800 million for Intel. Die size differs substantially: the AMD chip uses two dies of 70.6 mm² each (2x 70.6 mm²), while the Intel chip uses a single 243 mm² die. The AMD chip is a mobile part on AMD Socket FL1; the Intel chip is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1851.

Memory support is DDR5 for both, both dual-channel. The AMD chip lists 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth and supports ECC memory. The Intel chip lists 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth but does not support ECC. PCIe lanes favor AMD: Gen 5 with 28 lanes (CPU only) versus Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics differ: the AMD uses Radeon 610M, the Intel uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 16EU. The AMD released on 2025-01-05; the Intel released on 2024-12-31. The AMD part number is 100-000001366; the Intel part number is unknown.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split. The AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX is the superior processor in every measured benchmark category. Its 11 wins out of 11 head-to-head tests, its 97th percentile ranking, and its average score of 106413 place it firmly in workstation-class territory. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T, with 0 wins and an 82nd percentile ranking, cannot match the AMD part in any recorded test.

The Intel part does offer higher memory bandwidth (102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s) and a more advanced 3 nm process node, but these architectural advantages do not translate into benchmark victories. The AMD part's 12 cores and 24 threads, combined with 64 MB L3 cache and a 5.20 GHz boost clock, deliver overwhelming multithreaded performance. The single-thread gap is small (2.6%), but it still favors AMD.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T is a desktop part with a locked multiplier and 10 threads. Its benchmark profile places it alongside the Intel Core i9-11980HK and AMD Ryzen 5 7640HS, which are older or lower-tier parts. The Ryzen 9 9850HX, by contrast, sits next to Intel Xeon w7-3555 and AMD EPYC 8324P. The data indicates two different performance classes.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most benchmarks?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX wins all 11 head-to-head benchmarks. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T wins none.

Q: How large is the multithreaded performance gap?

A: The AMD scores 51722 in the PassMark multithread test versus 25358 for Intel, a 104% advantage. The AMD part has 12 cores and 24 threads; the Intel part has 10 cores and 10 threads.

Q: Is the Intel part competitive in single-thread performance?

A: The Intel scores 4348 in the PassMark single-thread test versus 4461 for AMD, a 2.6% gap. The AMD still leads, but this is the closest category.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth figures?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T lists 102.4 GB/s, while the AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX lists 89.6 GB/s. Both use DDR5 in dual-channel mode.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX supports ECC memory; the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T does not.

Q: What are the process nodes?

A: The AMD uses a 4 nm process; the Intel uses a 3 nm process. Both are fabricated by TSMC.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX wins in data compression (662381 versus 233998), data encryption (32139 versus 18289), extended instructions (53817 versus 20083), find prime numbers (323 versus 284), floating point math (115062 versus 82751), integer math (172943 versus 59543), multithread (51722 versus 25358), physics (3054 versus 2053), random string sorting (70175 versus 28774), single-thread (4461 versus 4348), and the duplicate single-thread test (4461 versus 4348). That is every category in the head-to-head set.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T wins no recorded benchmark against the AMD part. It does hold advantages in certain specifications: process node (3 nm versus 4 nm), memory bandwidth (102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s), per-core L1 cache (192 KB versus 80 KB), per-core L2 cache (3 MB versus 1 MB), and TDP is higher at 65 W versus 55 W, which indicates a different power envelope. The Intel also has a larger single die (243 mm² versus 2x 70.6 mm²) and a higher transistor count (17,800 million versus 16,630 million). These specification wins do not convert to benchmark wins.

For workloads that depend on integer throughput, compression, encryption, or extended instruction sets, the AMD part is decisively ahead by margins from 75.7% to 190.5%. For workloads that depend on single-thread speed, the AMD part is only 2.6% ahead, meaning the Intel part is nearly competitive there. For workloads that depend on memory bandwidth, the Intel part's 102.4 GB/s specification is higher, but no benchmark in the recorded data isolates that advantage.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX | Intel Core Ultra 5 225T |

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

| Cores | 12 | 10 |

| Threads | 24 | 10 |

| Base clock | 3.00 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.20 GHz | 4.90 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FL1 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Arrow Lake |

| Codename | Fire Range | Arrow Lake-S |

| Process node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Transistors | 16,630 million | 17,800 million |

| Die size | 2x 70.6 mm² | 243 mm² |

| L1 cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

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

| L3 cache | 64 MB | 20 MB (shared) |

| Memory bus | Dual-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 28 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon 610M | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 16EU |

| Market segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Multiplier unlocked | Yes | No |

| Release date | 2025-01-05 | 2024-12-31 |

| Average benchmark score | 106413 | 30468 |

| Percentile vs all CPUs | 97 | 82 |