AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX and AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX are two flagship mobile processors that land in the same performance class. Benchmark data shows the Intel part wins the majority of head-to-head tests, but the AMD chip counters with decisive wins in specific workloads. Both sit in the 97th percentile of all CPUs, and their average benchmark scores differ by only 0.2% — Intel at 85124, AMD at 84952. That near-identical average hides a lopsided win distribution: Intel takes 14 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, while AMD wins three.

The Verdict

If the goal is maximum multi-threaded rendering, physics simulation, or single-thread responsiveness, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX is the data-backed choice. It wins every Cinebench test by a consistent 8.5%, and its PassMark multithread score of 62297 is 8.1% ahead of the AMD’s 57640. The Intel chip also dominates encryption, prime-number finding, floating-point math, and physics workloads, with leads ranging from 40.3% to 69.9%.

However, the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX is not without a clear niche. It wins integer math by a massive 25.4% (218727 vs 163213), data compression by 5.9% (753225 vs 709118), and extended instructions by 8.3% (59765 vs 54810). For workloads that rely on integer arithmetic, compression, or SIMD-heavy extended instruction sets, the AMD part is the stronger pick. The average benchmark scores are effectively tied, so the decision hinges on which specific tasks matter most.

Architecture Differences

The two chips are built on different process nodes and core designs. Intel’s Arrow Lake-HX uses a 3 nm TSMC process with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. AMD’s Fire Range (Zen 5) uses a 4 nm TSMC process with 16,630 million transistors spread across two 70.6 mm² dies. Intel packs 24 cores and 24 threads — no simultaneous multithreading — while AMD offers 16 cores and 32 threads via SMT. This explains why AMD’s per-core cache is smaller but its shared L3 is larger: Intel has 192 KB L1 and 3 MB L2 per core, plus 36 MB shared L3; AMD has 80 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 per core, but 64 MB shared L3.

Memory bandwidth also differs. Intel supports 102.4 GB/s over dual-channel DDR5, while AMD manages 89.6 GB/s. Both support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity favors AMD: 28 Gen 5 lanes (CPU only) versus Intel’s 20. Integrated graphics differ as well — Intel uses Arc Xe-LPG with 64 execution units, AMD a Radeon 610M. Both are unlocked, mobile parts with a 55 W TDP, and both are currently active in production.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The biggest wins for Intel come in Cinebench. Across R15, R20, and R23, Intel leads every multi-core and single-core test by 8.5% to 8.6%. For example, Cinebench R23 multi-core shows Intel at 53000 versus AMD’s 48834, and single-core 7482 versus 6894. The pattern is consistent — Intel’s core count advantage (24 vs 16) and higher boost clock (5.50 GHz vs 5.40 GHz) translate directly to sustained multi-threaded performance.

In PassMark, Intel’s lead expands in specialized workloads. Data encryption shows Intel at 53869 against AMD’s 38386, a 40.3% advantage. Find prime numbers yields 503 vs 296 — a 69.9% margin. Floating-point math sees Intel at 210220 versus 140152, a 50% lead. Physics simulation is also Intel-favored: 3970 vs 2792, a 42.2% gap. Random string sorting adds another 10.1% win (87568 vs 79529). Even single-thread PassMark shows Intel ahead by 7.3% (4784 vs 4459).

AMD’s three wins are concentrated in integer and compression-heavy tasks. Integer math is AMD’s strongest showing: 218727 vs 163213, a 25.4% margin. Data compression goes to AMD at 753225 versus 709118 — a 5.9% lead. Extended instructions also favor AMD: 59765 vs 54810, an 8.3% gap. These results suggest AMD’s Zen 5 architecture handles integer-heavy and SIMD workloads more efficiently, despite losing the broader multi-threaded tests.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. Intel has 24 cores and 24 threads; AMD has 16 cores and 32 threads. Base clocks are 2.80 GHz (Intel) versus 2.50 GHz (AMD); boost clocks 5.50 GHz versus 5.40 GHz. Sockets are Intel BGA 2114 and AMD Socket FL1. Process nodes are 3 nm (Intel) and 4 nm (AMD), both TSMC. Transistor counts are 17,800 million vs 16,630 million. Die sizes are 243 mm² (single die) versus 2x 70.6 mm² (dual die). Cache layout: Intel uses 192 KB L1 and 3 MB L2 per core with 36 MB shared L3; AMD uses 80 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 per core with 64 MB shared L3. Memory bandwidth is 102.4 GB/s for Intel and 89.6 GB/s for AMD. PCIe lanes: Intel 20, AMD 28. Integrated graphics: Intel Arc Xe-LPG 64EU, AMD Radeon 610M. Release dates are 2025-01-12 (Intel) and 2025-01-05 (AMD). Part numbers are SRVFJ and 100-000001028. Both share TDP (55 W), dual-channel DDR5, ECC support, unlocked multiplier, and mobile market segment.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench multi-core?

A: Intel wins every Cinebench multi-core test by 8.5%. Cinebench R23 shows 53000 vs 48834.

Q: Does AMD have any clear advantages?

A: Yes. AMD wins integer math by 25.4% (218727 vs 163213), data compression by 5.9% (753225 vs 709118), and extended instructions by 8.3% (59765 vs 54810).

Q: Which chip has more L3 cache?

A: AMD has 64 MB shared L3, while Intel has 36 MB shared L3.

Q: How do memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: Intel offers 102.4 GB/s, AMD offers 89.6 GB/s, both over dual-channel DDR5.

Q: Are both processors in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both are in the 97th percentile of all CPUs. Their average benchmark scores differ by only 0.2% (85124 vs 84952).

Q: Which has more PCIe lanes?

A: AMD provides 28 Gen 5 lanes (CPU only), Intel provides 20.

Where Each One Wins

Intel’s benchmark wins cover the broadest range of tasks. It leads in all Cinebench versions (R15, R20, R23) for both multi-core and single-core, making it the better choice for 3D rendering, video encoding, and any workload that scales with thread count. Its encryption performance (40.3% ahead) suits security-focused applications, while its floating-point math lead (50%) benefits scientific computing. Physics simulation (42.2% ahead) and random string sorting (10.1% ahead) round out a suite that favors Intel for general-purpose productivity and content creation.

AMD’s three wins point to more specialized use cases. The 25.4% advantage in integer math makes it attractive for database operations, financial modeling, and certain AI inference tasks that rely on integer arithmetic. The data compression win (5.9%) helps in file archiving and storage workloads. Extended instructions (8.3% ahead) could benefit media processing and cryptography that use SIMD extensions. For users who know their workload is integer-heavy or compression-centric, the AMD chip is the data-driven pick; for everything else, Intel’s broader dominance makes it the safer recommendation.