AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads. The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D has 16 cores and 32 threads. The AMD part has fewer cores but uses simultaneous multithreading to reach 32 threads, while the Intel part offers pure physical cores.

Q: How do the two processors compare in overall Cinebench multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus leads in Cinebench R23 multi-core with a score of 42718 versus 38161.5 for the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D, a delta of -10.7% from the AMD side. However, in the older Cinebench R15 multi-core test, the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D wins with 6042.5 against 4305, a 40.4% advantage.

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus dominates single-core tests. In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 6030 versus 2159.5 for AMD, a 64.2% lead. In PassMark single-thread, Intel scores 4698 versus 4511 for AMD, a smaller 4% lead.

Q: What is the difference in the 3D V-Cache and cache hierarchy?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D uses 128 MB of L3 cache, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part has 80 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, whereas the Intel part has 192 KB of L1 per core and 3 MB of L2 per core.

Q: Which processor has the higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, compared to 89.6 GB/s for the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D. Both support DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D has an average benchmark score of 97453, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has an average score of 66159, placing it in the 93rd percentile.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D is built on the Zen 5 architecture with the Fire Range codename, fabricated on a 4 nm process node at TSMC. It uses a chiplet design with a die size of 2x 70.6 mm² and contains 16,630 million transistors. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus uses the Arrow Lake Refresh codename from the Core Ultra Series 2, fabricated on a 3 nm process node at TSMC with a monolithic die of 243 mm² and 17,800 million transistors. The AMD part belongs to the 9000 series and is the Ryzen 9 generation, while the Intel part is from the Ultra 5 generation under the Arrow Lake architecture.

The cache architectures diverge sharply. The AMD processor carries 128 MB of L3 cache, a feature tied to its 3D V-Cache technology, which is absent in the Intel part's 30 MB shared L3. The AMD L1 is 80 KB per core, and L2 is 1 MB per core. The Intel L1 is 192 KB per core, and L2 is 3 MB per core. This means the Intel part has larger per-core L1 and L2 caches, but the AMD part has over four times the L3 capacity.

The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D includes integrated graphics in the form of a Radeon 610M, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has no integrated graphics ("N/A"). The AMD part uses the AMD Socket FL1, and the Intel part uses the Intel Socket 1851. Both support PCIe Gen 5, but the AMD part provides 28 lanes (CPU only) versus 20 lanes (CPU only) for Intel.

The AMD part has a TDP of 55 W, a base clock of 2.50 GHz, and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The Intel part has a TDP of 125 W, a base clock of 4.20 GHz, and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. Both are multiplier-unlocked and support ECC memory. The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D targets the mobile segment, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus targets the desktop segment. The AMD part released on 2025-01-05, and the Intel part released on 2026-03-10.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a split decision: the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D wins 8 of 15 benchmarks, and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus wins 7. The largest AMD victory is in PassMark integer math, where the AMD scores 222503 versus 123030 for Intel, an 80.9% lead. The second-largest is in PassMark physics, where AMD scores 4687 versus 3183, a 47.3% lead. In PassMark extended instructions, AMD scores 62813 versus 42880, a 46.5% lead. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, AMD scores 6042.5 versus 4305, a 40.4% lead. In PassMark data compression, AMD scores 785811 versus 553155, a 42.1% lead.

The Intel wins are concentrated in single-core and some floating-point workloads. The largest Intel victory is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where Intel scores 6030 versus 2159.5 for AMD, a 64.2% lead. In Cinebench R15 single-core, Intel scores 607 versus 332, a 45.3% lead. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, Intel scores 42718 versus 38161.5, a 10.7% lead. In PassMark floating-point math, Intel scores 159824 versus 144122, a 9.8% lead. In PassMark single-thread, Intel scores 4698 versus 4511, a 4% lead. In PassMark data encryption, Intel scores 41292 versus 39446, a 4.5% lead.

The AMD part wins in PassMark multithread (62674 versus 50146, a 25% lead), PassMark random string sorting (83497 versus 67209, a 24.2% lead), and PassMark find prime numbers (525 versus 452, a 16.2% lead). The Cinebench R15 multi-core result for AMD (6042.5) is the stronger outlier relative to the R23 multi-core result, where Intel leads. This suggests that the AMD part's advantage in certain multi-core workloads depends heavily on the workload's cache sensitivity and thread scaling, while the Intel part's higher core count (18 versus 16) and higher base clock (4.20 GHz versus 2.50 GHz) drive its wins in modern multi-core and single-core tests.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads. The AMD base clock is 2.50 GHz, and the Intel base clock is 4.20 GHz. The AMD boost clock is 5.40 GHz, and the Intel boost clock is 5.30 GHz. The AMD TDP is 55 W, and the Intel TDP is 125 W. The AMD socket is AMD Socket FL1, and the Intel socket is Intel Socket 1851.

The process node differs: AMD uses 4 nm, and Intel uses 3 nm, both from TSMC. The transistor count differs (16,630 million for AMD versus 17,800 million for Intel), and the die size differs (2x 70.6 mm² for AMD versus 243 mm² for Intel). The cache hierarchy differs as described: L1 is 80 KB per core for AMD versus 192 KB per core for Intel, L2 is 1 MB per core for AMD versus 3 MB per core for Intel, and L3 is 128 MB for AMD versus 30 MB shared for Intel.

Memory bandwidth differs: 89.6 GB/s for AMD versus 115.2 GB/s for Intel. PCIe lanes differ: 28 lanes for AMD versus 20 lanes for Intel, both CPU-only Gen 5. Integrated graphics differ: AMD has Radeon 610M, Intel has N/A. Market segment differs: AMD is mobile, Intel is desktop. Release dates differ: 2025-01-05 for AMD versus 2026-03-10 for Intel. The part numbers differ: 100-000001030 for AMD versus SA4V3 for Intel. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $184, while the AMD part has no listed launch MSRP.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D wins in integer-heavy and compression workloads. The 80.9% lead in PassMark integer math and the 42.1% lead in PassMark data compression indicate strong performance in data processing, database operations, and general integer computation. The 46.5% lead in PassMark extended instructions suggests the AMD part handles SIMD and specialized instruction sets more efficiently. The 47.3% lead in PassMark physics points to advantages in simulation and physics calculations. The 25% lead in PassMark multithread and the 24.2% lead in PassMark random string sorting show that the AMD part excels in heavily threaded tasks that benefit from its 32 threads and large 128 MB L3 cache. The Cinebench R15 multi-core win (40.4%) reinforces this pattern for legacy multi-threaded rendering.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus wins in single-core and modern rendering workloads. The 64.2% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core and the 45.3% lead in Cinebench R15 single-core demonstrate a substantial clock-for-clock and architecture advantage in lightly threaded tasks. The 10.7% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core shows that in current-generation rendering, the Intel part's 18 physical cores and higher base clock (4.20 GHz) outperform the AMD part's 16 cores with SMT. The 9.8% lead in PassMark floating-point math indicates stronger FPU throughput. The 4% lead in PassMark single-thread (4698 versus 4511) confirms a modest but consistent edge in general single-threaded work. The 4.5% lead in PassMark data encryption shows an advantage in cryptographic workloads.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear split by workload type. The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D is the stronger choice for integer-intensive, cache-sensitive, and highly parallel workloads, as evidenced by its 80.9% lead in integer math, 42.1% lead in data compression, and 47.3% lead in physics. Its 128 MB L3 cache and 32 threads give it a unique edge in server-style and scientific workloads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is the stronger choice for single-core performance and modern rendering, with a 64.2% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core and a 10.7% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core. Its 18 physical cores and higher base clock make it more suitable for desktop workloads that prioritize raw frequency and current-generation software.

The average benchmark scores reflect this split: the AMD part averages 97453 (96th percentile), while the Intel part averages 66159 (93rd percentile). The AMD part sits close to the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX (average 98504, delta -1.1%) and ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 9945 (average 96083, delta 1.4%). The Intel part sits near the Intel Core 9 273PQE (average 66099, delta 0.1%) and behind the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus (average 66855, delta -1%). The mobile versus desktop segment distinction matters: the AMD part achieves its results at a 55 W TDP, while the Intel part uses 125 W. The Intel part has the higher memory bandwidth (115.2 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s) and the higher base clock, but the AMD part has the higher boost clock (5.40 GHz versus 5.30 GHz) and the larger L3 cache. The verdict depends on the intended use case: the AMD part for thread-heavy, cache-dependent mobile computing, and the Intel part for single-core and modern multi-core desktop tasks.