AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX vs Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus Comparison

AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX and Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus are both flagship mobile processors, but the benchmark data splits them into two very distinct personalities. The AMD part is a specialist, dominating specific computational workloads, while the Intel part is a generalist, taking the majority of the wins across a broader range of tests. The recorded data shows a clear trade-off between raw multithreaded throughput and specialized instruction execution.

Where Each One Wins

The use-case split is stark. The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX wins 3 of the 15 head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus wins 12. The AMD victories are concentrated in workloads that stress integer math, data compression, and extended instruction sets. The Intel chip, conversely, claims victory in all three Cinebench rendering tests, both single-core tests, and the majority of the PassMark suite, including floating-point math, physics, encryption, and prime number finding.

This indicates the AMD processor is optimized for specific server-like or scientific tasks where its architecture excels. The Intel processor is the stronger all-rounder for content creation, general productivity, and tasks that rely on single-threaded performance. For users who primarily compile code, run compression algorithms, or handle large integer-based calculations, the AMD chip is the clear winner. For everyone else, especially those rendering 3D scenes or using physics simulations, the Intel chip is the better choice.

Architecture Differences

The two chips are built on fundamentally different designs. The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX uses the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Fire Range, and is manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It has 16 cores and 32 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. Its cache configuration includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a large 64 MB shared L3 cache. The chip is built from two dies, each measuring 70.6 mm², totaling 16,630 million transistors.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus uses the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh architecture and is manufactured on a more advanced 3 nm process, also at TSMC. It has 24 cores but only 24 threads, meaning it does not use simultaneous multithreading. Its base clock is 2.70 GHz and its boost clock is 5.50 GHz. The cache hierarchy is different: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and a smaller 36 MB shared L3 cache. The entire chip is a single 243 mm² die containing 17,800 million transistors.

The architectural split is clear. AMD uses fewer, larger cores with simultaneous multithreading and a massive shared L3 cache. Intel uses more physical cores without multithreading, each with larger individual L1 and L2 caches, but a smaller pool of shared L3. This explains the performance profile: AMD's large cache helps with compression and integer work, while Intel's higher clock speeds and larger per-core caches boost single-threaded and floating-point performance.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench tests show a consistent Intel advantage in rendering workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel chip scores 39684 against the AMD chip's 37159, a 6.4% lead. The R15 multi-core test is closer, with Intel winning 5981 to 5905, a margin of only 1.3%. Single-core results also favor Intel: in R23 single-core, Intel scores 2356 versus 2174, a 7.7% lead, and in R15 single-core, Intel wins 340 to 336, a 1.2% margin.

The PassMark suite reveals where each chip dominates. The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX wins data compression with a score of 731998 against Intel's 658724, an 11.1% advantage. It also wins extended instructions (57946 vs 51290, a 13% lead) and integer math (212598 vs 164839, a substantial 29% lead). These are the AMD chip's strongest areas.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus takes the remaining PassMark tests with varying margins. The largest Intel win is in prime number finding, where it scores 519 against AMD's 287, a massive 44.7% advantage. Floating-point math also heavily favors Intel: 201773 vs 136682, a 32.3% lead. Data encryption shows a 25.4% Intel advantage (50008 vs 37330). Physics simulation is 19.7% better on Intel (3387 vs 2720). Single-thread performance is 11.3% higher on Intel (4951 vs 4393). The multithread test is closer, with Intel winning 59439 to 56171, a 5.5% margin. Random string sorting also goes to Intel, 80327 vs 77890, a 3% lead.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications. The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads. AMD's base clock is 2.50 GHz, Intel's is 2.70 GHz. AMD's boost clock is 5.40 GHz, Intel's is 5.50 GHz. Both have a 55 W TDP.

The process node differs: AMD uses 4 nm, Intel uses 3 nm. Transistor counts are close, with AMD at 16,630 million and Intel at 17,800 million. The die configuration is very different: AMD uses two 70.6 mm² dies, Intel uses one 243 mm² die. Cache sizes are also distinct: AMD has 80 KB L1 per core and 1 MB L2 per core, while Intel has 192 KB L1 per core and 3 MB L2 per core. The shared L3 is 64 MB on AMD and 36 MB on Intel.

Memory bandwidth is higher on Intel at 102.4 GB/s versus AMD's 89.6 GB/s. PCIe lanes differ: AMD has 28 Gen 5 lanes, Intel has 20 Gen 5 lanes. The integrated graphics are different: AMD uses Radeon 610M, Intel uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. Both support DDR5 memory and ECC memory, and both are unlocked for overclocking. The release dates are different, with AMD releasing earlier and Intel later.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 24 cores, which is more than the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX's 16 cores. However, the AMD chip has 32 threads due to simultaneous multithreading, while the Intel chip has only 24 threads.

Q: Does the Intel chip have a higher boost clock?

A: Yes, the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus boosts to 5.50 GHz, which is 0.10 GHz higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX's 5.40 GHz.

Q: Which processor is better for floating-point math?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is significantly better, scoring 201773 in the PassMark floating-point math test, which is 32.3% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX's 136682.

Q: Which processor has the larger shared L3 cache?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX has a 64 MB shared L3 cache, which is nearly double the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus's 36 MB.

Q: Which processor leads in the Cinebench R23 multi-core test?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus leads with a score of 39684, which is 6.4% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX's 37159.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, which is higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX's 89.6 GB/s.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear conclusion for different user profiles. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is the superior general-purpose processor. It wins the majority of benchmark tests, including all rendering workloads, single-thread tests, and most PassMark subtests. Its higher boost clock, larger per-core caches, and higher memory bandwidth make it the better choice for content creation, 3D rendering, and everyday productivity tasks. The 12 wins out of 15 head-to-head comparisons confirm its overall dominance.

The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX is the specialist. Its 29% lead in integer math and 11.1% lead in data compression make it the stronger option for specific computational workloads. The 64 MB shared L3 cache and simultaneous multithreading are clear advantages for code compilation, compression algorithms, and integer-heavy scientific computing. The AMD chip also wins extended instructions by 13%, indicating an edge in certain specialized instruction sets.

For most users, the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is the safer, more versatile choice. The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX is the pick only for those whose primary workloads align precisely with its specific strengths. The average benchmark scores reflect this: the AMD chip has a higher average score of 91199 across all its tests, but the Intel chip is more consistently competitive across a wider range of tasks. The choice comes down to matching the processor to the specific workload, not to overall performance.