AMD Ryzen 9 9900X vs Intel Core 5 330 Comparison

AMD Ryzen 9 9900X and Intel Core 5 330 occupy different ends of the computing spectrum. The Ryzen 9 9900X is a 12-core desktop processor aimed at high-throughput workloads, while the Core 5 330 is a 6-core mobile chip built for efficiency. The benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap, with the AMD part winning all 15 shared tests. However, the Intel part operates in a completely different power and physical envelope, which shapes how these results should be interpreted.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data shows a clean sweep for the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X across every head-to-head test. The AMD processor wins all 15 comparisons, including single-thread, multi-thread, and specialized workload tests. The Intel Core 5 330 does not win any of the shared benchmarks.

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X delivers its largest advantages in heavily parallel workloads. In PassMark integer math, it scores 181,056 against 33,258, a 444.4% delta. Data compression shows a 370.5% lead, random string sorting a 305.2% lead, and prime number finding a 282.5% lead. These are tasks that scale directly with core count and thread count, where the Ryzen 9 9900X's 12 cores and 24 threads overwhelm the Core 5 330's 6 cores and 6 threads.

The Intel Core 5 330 does show relative strength in single-threaded performance. In PassMark single thread, it scores 4,088 against 4,672 for the AMD part, a gap of only 14.3%. That is the closest margin in the entire dataset. The Core 5 330 also trails by 21.4% in Cinebench R23 single-core, which is far smaller than the multi-core deltas. This suggests the Intel chip is not completely outclassed in lightly threaded tasks, but it still loses every test.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X records an average benchmark score of 57,498, while the Intel Core 5 330 averages 18,345. The AMD part sits in the 92nd percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 72nd percentile for the Intel part.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X scores 32,172 versus 13,150 for the Intel Core 5 330, a 144.7% difference. The largest multi-core delta is in PassMark integer math at 444.4%.

Q: Is the Intel Core 5 330 competitive in single-threaded tests?

A: The Intel part is closer in single-threaded workloads but still loses. In PassMark single thread, it trails by 14.3% (4,088 vs 4,672). In Cinebench R23 single-core, the gap is 21.4% (1,856 vs 2,253).

Q: What are the power requirements for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X has a TDP of 120 watts, while the Intel Core 5 330 has a TDP of 15 watts. This is an 8x difference in thermal design power.

Q: Do these processors support ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 5 330 does not.

Q: What memory types does each support?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X supports DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 5 330 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single delta in the database is PassMark integer math, where the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X scores 181,056 against 33,258 for the Intel Core 5 330, a 444.4% advantage. This test emphasizes raw integer processing throughput, and the AMD part's 12 cores, 24 threads, and 64 MB of L3 cache provide a massive parallel advantage.

Data compression shows the second-largest gap. The AMD part scores 683,579 versus 145,287, a 370.5% delta. This workload benefits from both high core counts and large caches, both of which favor the Ryzen 9 9900X. Extended instructions follow at 331.3% (55,243 vs 12,808), and random string sorting at 305.2% (72,013 vs 17,771).

Multi-threaded rendering tests reinforce the pattern. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a 278% delta (5,008 vs 1,325), while Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a 144.7% delta (32,172 vs 13,150). The PassMark multithread test records a 253.2% delta (54,643 vs 15,471). Floating point math shows a 173.6% delta (120,083 vs 43,885), and physics a 181.5% delta (3,381 vs 1,201).

Single-threaded results are the only area where the Intel part approaches parity. PassMark single thread shows a 14.3% delta (4,672 vs 4,088), and Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 21.4% delta (2,253 vs 1,856). Cinebench R15 single-core shows a larger 89.8% delta (353 vs 186), which is an outlier compared to the other single-threaded tests. Data encryption shows a 201.7% delta (33,421 vs 11,076), and prime number finding a 282.5% delta (436 vs 114).

Specification Differences

The core configuration is the most obvious difference. The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning it lacks simultaneous multithreading. This alone explains most of the multi-core benchmark gaps.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The AMD part has a base clock of 4.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. The Intel part has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The lower base clock on the Intel chip reflects its mobile design and 15 watt TDP.

Memory support diverges as well. The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X uses dual-channel DDR5 with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth and supports ECC. The Intel Core 5 330 uses single-channel DDR5 or LPDDR5X with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC support. The AMD part also offers PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes, while the Intel part offers PCIe Gen 4 with 6 lanes.

The sockets are incompatible. The AMD part uses AMD Socket AM5, a desktop platform. The Intel part uses Intel BGA 1516, a soldered mobile package. The AMD multiplier is unlocked, while the Intel multiplier is locked. The AMD part has a launch MSRP of $499, and the Intel part has a launch MSRP of $309.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is built on the Zen 5 architecture with the Granite Ridge codename, part of the Ryzen 9 generation. It uses a 4 nm process from TSMC and contains 16,630 million transistors across a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². Cache is organized per core: 80 KB L1, 1 MB L2, and a shared 64 MB L3. It includes Radeon Graphics as integrated graphics.

The Intel Core 5 330 uses the Wildcat Lake codename, part of the Core 5 generation. It is built on a 3 nm process from Intel. Cache is structured differently: 192 KB L1 total, 2.5 MB L2 total, and 6 MB shared L3. It includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The process node is smaller at 3 nm versus 4 nm, which helps the Intel part achieve its low power draw despite the lower clock speeds.

The AMD part is a desktop processor with an active production status and a release date of August 2024. The Intel part is a mobile processor with an active production status and a release date of April 2026. The AMD part uses a dual-die design with two 70.6 mm² chiplets, while the Intel part uses a single monolithic die, though the die size is not recorded.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion. The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is the superior processor in every measured benchmark, with a 92nd percentile ranking and an average score of 57,498. It leads by margins ranging from 14.3% in single-threaded PassMark to 444.4% in integer math. For any workload that uses multiple cores, the AMD part is the clear choice.

The Intel Core 5 330 cannot match the Ryzen 9 9900X in raw performance, but it operates in a different class. Its 15 watt TDP versus 120 watts, single-channel memory, and mobile BGA socket make it a low-power part for compact systems. Its 72nd percentile ranking places it near the Intel Core i3-14100, which has an average score of 18,318, a 0.1% delta. The Core 5 330 also sits within 0.2% of the Core 7 360 and Core 3 305, indicating it is competitive within its own efficiency-focused segment.

For a desktop builder prioritizing multi-threaded throughput, the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X is the only option with data support. For a mobile system where power draw and physical size matter more than benchmark scores, the Intel Core 5 330 offers a closer single-threaded margin at a fraction of the power envelope. The benchmark results do not suggest any scenario where the Intel part wins a performance test, but the power and platform differences are large enough that the comparison is not purely about speed.