AMD Ryzen AI 5 440G vs Intel Core Ultra 7 255H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive picture: the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H wins every single head-to-head comparison recorded in the database, taking all 11 tests against the AMD Ryzen AI 5 440G. The margins vary considerably by workload, which reveals where the architectural differences matter most.

The largest gap appears in the prime number finding test, where Intel scores 303 against AMD's 90, a 70.3% advantage. This is a workload heavily dependent on integer throughput and branch prediction, suggesting the Intel design has a substantial efficiency edge in that specific computation pattern. Floating point math shows a similarly dramatic split: Intel posts 98,796 versus AMD's 45,711, a 53.7% lead. This near-doubling of floating point performance is one of the most striking findings in the entire comparison.

Data encryption is another major differentiator. Intel scores 23,395 while AMD manages only 13,585, a 41.9% deficit. The physics test follows with Intel at 2,254 against AMD's 1,329, a 41% gap. These results indicate that Intel's execution resources scale much better under heavy computational loads that benefit from parallel instruction streams.

Multi-threaded performance shows Intel ahead by 23.5%, scoring 30,703 versus 23,487. This is a meaningful margin, though smaller than the extreme deltas seen in prime numbers or floating point. The random string sorting test gives Intel a 13.7% edge (36,058 vs 31,106), while extended instructions show a 13.1% advantage (23,755 vs 20,648).

Integer math is closer, with Intel ahead by only 8.6% (77,975 vs 71,251). The tightest race is data compression, where Intel's 298,850 barely edges AMD's 292,735, a difference of just 2%. Single-thread performance also lands in Intel's favor, but by a modest 6%: 4,317 versus 4,060.

The data implies that AMD's 6-core design with 12 threads is competitive in lightly threaded integer work, but falls behind substantially as workloads expand across more cores and demand greater memory bandwidth or wider execution. The 16-core Intel chip, despite having 16 threads (not 32), clearly leverages its additional physical cores to dominate multi-threaded and vector-heavy tasks.

Architecture Differences

The two processors take fundamentally different design paths. AMD's Ryzen AI 5 440G uses a 6-core, 12-thread configuration built on the Gorgon Point codename, part of the Ryzen AI 400 generation with Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. It is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC with a die size of 195 mm². Intel's Core Ultra 7 255H belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, using the Arrow Lake architecture with the Arrow Lake-H codename. It packs 16 cores and 16 threads on a 3 nm TSMC process node.

Cache organization differs substantially. AMD allocates 80 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core, with a total of 8 MB of L3 cache. Intel provides 192 KB of L1 and 3 MB of L2 per core, plus a shared 24 MB L3 pool. This tripling of L3 capacity gives Intel a significant advantage for workloads that repeatedly access large datasets.

Memory support also diverges. AMD lists DDR5 with dual-channel configuration and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. Intel supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, with a higher 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The 12.8 GB/s bandwidth advantage for Intel helps explain its lead in data-heavy tests like encryption and floating point math.

PCIe connectivity shows another clear split. AMD offers Gen 4 with 12 lanes from the CPU, while Intel provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes. This affects peripheral and accelerator throughput potential, though the benchmark data focuses on CPU computation rather than I/O.

Socket and platform choices reinforce their different market segments. AMD uses Socket AM5, a desktop platform, and the chip is marked as a Desktop product. Intel uses BGA 2049, a mobile socket, and is classified as Mobile. The AMD chip has an unlocked multiplier, while Intel's is locked. Intel's TDP is 28 watts versus AMD's 65 watts, yet Intel still wins every test, which is a remarkable efficiency result. The AMD part also has a larger die despite fewer cores, suggesting the Zen 5c cores may be denser or the design includes other elements.

Integrated graphics differ as well: AMD pairs with Radeon 840M, while Intel uses Arc Graphics 140T. Both support ECC memory. Release timing places AMD in early 2026, while Intel arrived in January 2025, roughly a year earlier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 440G has 6 cores and 12 threads. Intel's core count is more than double, but its thread count is only 4 higher because it does not use simultaneous multithreading.

Q: How much faster is Intel in multi-threaded performance?

A: In the PassMark multi-thread test, Intel scores 30,703 versus AMD's 23,487, a 23.5% advantage. The gap is even larger in floating point math, where Intel leads by 53.7%, and in prime number finding, where Intel leads by 70.3%.

Q: Is there any benchmark where AMD wins?

A: No. The recorded head-to-head data shows Intel winning all 11 benchmark comparisons. The closest margin is data compression, where Intel leads by only 2%, and single-thread performance, where Intel leads by 6%.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: Intel is rated at 28 watts TDP, while AMD is rated at 65 watts. Despite the lower power envelope, Intel delivers higher performance in every recorded test, which indicates a substantial efficiency advantage.

Q: How do their memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: Intel supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. AMD supports DDR5 only, with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. Intel's bandwidth is approximately 14% higher, which contributes to its lead in memory-intensive workloads.

Q: Which process node does each use?

A: Intel uses a 3 nm process from TSMC. AMD uses a 4 nm process from TSMC. The smaller node may contribute to Intel's efficiency, though the architecture differences are also significant.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Ryzen AI 5 440G | Intel Core Ultra 7 255H |

|--------|---------------------|-------------------------|

| Cores | 6 | 16 |

| Threads | 12 | 16 |

| Boost Clock | 4.80 GHz | 5.10 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 28 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM5 | Intel BGA 2049 |

| Architecture | Gorgon Point | Arrow Lake |

| Codename | Gorgon Point | Arrow Lake-H |

| Generation | Ryzen AI 400 (Zen 5 / Zen 5c) | Ultra 7 (Arrow Lake-H) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Die Size | 195 mm² | Not specified |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB per core | 192 KB per core |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB per core | 3 MB per core |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB | 24 MB shared |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 12 Lanes | Gen 5, 20 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 840M | Arc Graphics 140T |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Release Date | 2026-02-28 | 2025-01-12 |

| Part Number | 100-000001918 | SRQAN |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H wins every measured benchmark category, so the practical question is not whether it wins, but by how much in each workload type. The largest margins come in floating point math (53.7% ahead), prime number finding (70.3% ahead), data encryption (41.9% ahead), and physics simulation (41% ahead). These are compute-heavy tasks that scale with core count, cache size, and memory bandwidth.

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 440G has no benchmark wins, but its smallest deficits reveal where it is least disadvantaged. Data compression trails by only 2%, and single-thread performance by 6%. Integer math is within 8.6%. These results suggest that in lightly threaded integer workloads, the AMD chip is close to competitive. Its 12 threads from 6 cores with simultaneous multithreading may help in scenarios where thread count matters more than raw core count.

For users prioritizing floating point, cryptography, physics, or any workload that leverages wide vector units and large caches, the Intel chip is clearly superior. For everyday integer-heavy tasks with limited parallelism, the gap narrows considerably, though Intel still holds the lead.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward conclusion: the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H is the stronger processor across every recorded benchmark. It wins all 11 head-to-head tests, often by wide margins, while consuming less than half the TDP of the AMD chip. The 16-core design with 24 MB of L3 cache and 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth delivers consistently higher scores in multi-threaded, floating point, and encryption workloads.

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 440G is not without merit. Its 6-core, 12-thread configuration with Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores offers competitive single-thread performance within 6% of Intel, and its data compression score is nearly identical. The unlocked multiplier and desktop AM5 socket make it a more flexible platform for users who prioritize overclocking or system customization. Its 65 watt TDP suggests more headroom for sustained operation in a desktop chassis.

However, the benchmark results are unambiguous. Intel's 70.3% lead in prime number finding, 53.7% lead in floating point math, and 41.9% lead in encryption indicate a processor that handles demanding computational tasks far more effectively. The 23.5% multi-thread advantage reinforces this pattern.

The percentile rankings place AMD at 89th percentile versus Intel's 83rd among all CPUs, but this reflects the different market segments: AMD is a desktop part while Intel is a mobile part. The average benchmark score for AMD is 46,187, while Intel's average is 33,537, a difference driven largely by the benchmark sets each chip was tested with. The head-to-head tests, which use identical workloads, are the more reliable comparison.

For any workload that benefits from more cores, larger cache, higher memory bandwidth, or wider SIMD execution, the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H is the choice. For users locked into an AM5 desktop platform who want a capable 6-core processor with an unlocked multiplier, the AMD Ryzen AI 5 440G remains a viable option, particularly where the 2% data compression gap and 6% single-thread gap are acceptable trade-offs. The data, however, gives Intel a decisive victory in overall computational performance.