AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX vs Intel Core Ultra X7 358H Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX and the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H occupy different tiers in the mobile processor market, with the data showing a dominant performance lead for the AMD part across nearly every measured workload. The head-to-head benchmark results reveal a decisive 10 to 1 win margin in favor of the Ryzen 9 9850HX, though the Intel chip does secure a narrow victory in one specific compute task.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most significant discrepancy between the two processors appears in integer math performance. The AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX scores 172,943 in the PassMark integer math test, which is 108% higher than the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H's score of 83,147. This is the largest relative gap in the entire comparison, suggesting that the AMD architecture is far more efficient at handling general arithmetic and logic operations.

Data compression workloads show a similar, though slightly less extreme, pattern. The Ryzen 9 9850HX delivers a score of 662,381 in the PassMark data compression test, outperforming the Intel part's 332,508 by 99.2%. Extended instruction set performance also heavily favors AMD, with the Ryzen 9 9850HX scoring 53,817 versus 27,274 for the Core Ultra X7 358H, a difference of 97.3%.

The multi-threaded benchmark reinforces the AMD lead. The Ryzen 9 9850HX records 51,722 points in the PassMark multithread test, which is 53% ahead of the Intel chip's 33,802. Random string sorting, a test that often reflects memory subsystem efficiency and cache behavior, shows the AMD part at 70,175 points, beating the Intel processor's 40,357 by 73.9%.

Single-thread performance also goes to the AMD chip, though by a much smaller margin. The Ryzen 9 9850HX scores 4,461 in the PassMark single-thread test, which is 8.2% higher than the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H's 4,124. The two identical single-thread entries in the database confirm this result, with the same delta of 8.2% recorded for both.

Floating-point math is closer than integer math but still favors AMD. The Ryzen 9 9850HX scores 115,062, which is 10.8% above the Intel chip's 103,842. Data encryption shows a 23.4% advantage for the AMD part, with scores of 32,139 versus 26,046. The physics test is nearly a tie, with the Ryzen 9 9850HX at 3,054 and the Intel chip at 3,021, a difference of only 1.1%.

The sole win for the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H comes in the find prime numbers test. The Intel processor scores 337, edging out the AMD chip's 323 by 4.2%. This is the only benchmark where the Intel part claims victory, and the margin is modest relative to the AMD wins elsewhere.

The Verdict

The benchmark results indicate that the AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX is the substantially stronger processor for compute-intensive tasks. Its average benchmark score of 106,413 places it in the 97th percentile among all CPUs in the database, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H sits at an average score of 40,967, which corresponds to the 87th percentile.

Looking at the nearest rivals in the database clarifies the positioning. The AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX is grouped with high-end workstation processors: it sits 0.2% above the Intel Xeon w7-3555, 0.5% above the Intel Xeon 6521P, and 3% above the AMD EPYC 8324P. The only rival from its immediate peer group that beats it is the Intel Xeon w7-2595X, which is 2.1% higher in average score. This places the Ryzen 9 9850HX in the upper tier of desktop-class performance, despite being a mobile part.

The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H, by contrast, is grouped with mid-range mobile processors. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440, which scores 0.6% higher, the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H at 0.6% higher, the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435G at 0.6% lower, and the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H at 0.7% higher. The Intel part is essentially at parity with these chips, which is a lower performance class than the AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX occupies.

For workloads that stress multiple cores, heavily threaded applications, or raw arithmetic throughput, the data clearly favors the AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H offers a more power-efficient package, but the benchmark scores show it cannot match the AMD part in most compute scenarios, with the exception of the prime number search where it wins by 4.2%.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different designs. The AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX uses the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Fire Range, and is manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H uses the Panther Lake codename, part of the Core Ultra Series 3 generation, and is built on Intel's 3 nm process.

Core counts differ significantly. The AMD chip features 12 cores with 24 threads, while the Intel chip has 16 cores but only 16 threads, meaning it lacks simultaneous multithreading. This thread count difference contributes to the AMD part's large lead in multi-threaded benchmarks, as it can process 24 threads concurrently versus 16 for the Intel chip.

Clock speeds also favor AMD. The Ryzen 9 9850HX has a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H runs at a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The AMD chip also has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel part does not.

Cache hierarchies are quite different. The AMD processor uses 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 64 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel chip uses 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part's 64 MB L3 cache is more than three times the size of the Intel chip's 18 MB, which helps explain the AMD advantage in data-heavy workloads like compression and sorting.

Memory support differs as well. The AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus and a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, along with ECC memory support. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H supports LPDDR5X memory, also dual-channel, but with a higher bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s. The Intel part does not support ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity is a major difference. The AMD chip provides Gen 5 with 28 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel chip provides Gen 5 with only 4 lanes. The integrated graphics also differ, with AMD using a Radeon 610M and Intel using an Arc B390. The TDP rating is 55 watts for the AMD chip versus 25 watts for the Intel chip, reflecting the higher power envelope of the Ryzen 9 9850HX.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX boosts to 5.20 GHz, which is higher than the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H's boost clock of 4.80 GHz.

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H support ECC memory?

A: No, the database lists ECC memory support as false for the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H. The AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX does support ECC memory.

Q: What is the L3 cache capacity of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX has 64 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: How many threads does each processor handle?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX supports 24 threads from its 12 cores, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H supports 16 threads from its 16 cores.

Q: Which processor has a higher memory bandwidth rating?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H is rated for 153.6 GB/s, which is higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX's 89.6 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the difference in average benchmark score between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX has an average benchmark score of 106,413, which is more than double the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H's average of 40,967.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX wins in nearly all measured categories. Its largest margins come in integer math (108% ahead), data compression (99.2% ahead), extended instructions (97.3% ahead), random string sorting (73.9% ahead), and multithread performance (53% ahead). These results indicate that the AMD processor is better suited for applications that rely on heavy arithmetic, data processing, encryption, and parallel workloads. Its 64 MB L3 cache and 24 threads provide a substantial advantage in multi-threaded scenarios, and its higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz helps in single-thread responsiveness.

The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H wins only in the find prime numbers test, scoring 337 versus 323, a 4.2% margin. This suggests that the Intel architecture has a specific advantage in workloads that involve prime number generation, likely due to its instruction set or integer division efficiency. However, this is an isolated result and does not indicate a broader trend.

The Intel chip also offers advantages outside of raw compute benchmarks. It has a lower TDP of 25 watts versus 55 watts for the AMD part, which implies lower power consumption and potentially longer battery life in mobile systems. Its memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s is higher than the AMD chip's 89.6 GB/s, which could benefit memory-bound tasks, though the benchmark data does not show this translating into a win in the tested workloads. The Intel part also has a larger L2 cache per core at 3 MB versus 1 MB for AMD, and a larger L1 cache per core at 192 KB versus 80 KB.

For users prioritizing peak compute performance in multi-threaded, data-intensive, or arithmetic-heavy applications, the AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX is the clear choice based on the recorded data. For users who prioritize lower power draw or who run workloads specifically involving prime number searches, the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H has a niche advantage.