AMD Ryzen AI 5 440G vs Intel Core Ultra 9 386H Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data delivers a decisive split: the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H wins every single head-to-head comparison in the database, taking all 11 recorded tests. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 440G records zero wins across the measured workloads. This is not a close contest on any metric; the Intel part leads by margins ranging from a modest 3.7% to a dominant 73.6%.

The largest gaps appear in workloads that scale with core count and parallel execution. The Intel part holds a 73.6% advantage in prime number computation, a 57.9% lead in floating point math, and a 56.1% edge in physics simulation. These are heavily multithreaded tasks where the Intel chip's 16 cores versus the AMD chip's 6 cores create a structural advantage that clock speed alone cannot close.

The narrowest margin is in single-thread performance, where the Intel part leads by just 3.7% (4218 versus 4060). This suggests that per-core IPC is broadly similar between the two architectures, and the Intel advantage in lightly threaded workloads is real but modest. Data encryption shows a 50% gap, extended instructions a 29.1% gap, and random string sorting a 26.2% gap, all favoring Intel.

The AMD chip does sit in a higher overall percentile (89th versus 88th for Intel), which reflects its average benchmark score across all tests in the database rather than the head-to-head subset. The AMD part's average benchmark score is 46187 against Intel's 43210, a result driven by the fact that the AMD part's full benchmark suite includes tests where it performs relatively better. However, in the direct comparison tests recorded here, Intel wins every category.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 440G uses the Gorgon Point codename, belongs to the Ryzen AI 400 generation built on Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores, and is manufactured on a 4 nm process by TSMC. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H uses the Panther Lake architecture, belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3 generation (Panther Lake-H), and is built on a 3 nm process by Intel's own fabs.

Core counts diverge sharply. The AMD chip provides 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel chip provides 16 cores and 16 threads. The Intel part does not use simultaneous multithreading, so its thread count equals its core count. The AMD part uses SMT, doubling its thread count from 6 to 12. Despite having fewer threads, the AMD chip cannot overcome the raw core deficit in parallel workloads.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The AMD chip has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of L3 cache. The Intel chip has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The Intel L3 cache is more than double the AMD L3 cache, which helps in workloads with large working sets that benefit from shared cache capacity.

Memory support varies as well. The AMD chip supports DDR5 only with dual-channel memory and a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel chip supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X with dual-channel memory and a higher bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. ECC memory is supported by the AMD part but not the Intel part. PCIe connectivity differs: the AMD chip uses Gen 4 with 12 CPU lanes, while the Intel chip uses Gen 5 with 12 CPU lanes, offering double the per-lane bandwidth for compatible devices.

The integrated graphics differ: AMD pairs the CPU with Radeon 840M, while Intel uses Intel Xe3 Graphics. The AMD chip has an unlocked multiplier, whereas the Intel chip does not. The AMD part uses an AMD Socket AM5, making it a desktop processor, while the Intel part uses Intel BGA 2540, indicating a mobile design. The Intel part has a much lower TDP of 25 watts versus the AMD part's 65 watts, which is notable given the Intel chip's higher core count and performance.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most lopsided result is in prime number finding, where the Intel part scores 341 versus the AMD part's 90, a 73.6% advantage. This workload is highly sensitive to integer execution and parallelism, and the Intel chip's 16 cores overwhelm the AMD chip's 6 cores. Floating point math shows a similar pattern: Intel scores 108527 against 45711, a 57.9% lead. Physics simulation follows with Intel at 3028 versus 1329, a 56.1% gap.

Data encryption shows a 50% difference, with Intel at 27150 and AMD at 13585. This workload often benefits from dedicated instructions and parallel throughput, both of which favor the Intel design. Extended instructions see Intel ahead by 29.1% (29138 versus 20648), and random string sorting shows a 26.2% gap (42135 versus 31106). Integer math is closer but still favors Intel: 87284 versus 71251, an 18.4% difference.

Multithread performance, a broad measure of overall parallel capability, shows Intel at 35399 versus AMD at 23487, a 33.7% lead. Data compression follows with Intel at 352365 versus 292735, a 16.9% gap. The closest result is single-thread performance, where Intel scores 4218 and AMD scores 4060, a 3.7% difference. This indicates that for single-threaded applications, the two chips are nearly equivalent, with the Intel part holding a slight edge.

The average benchmark score for the AMD chip is 46187, placing it in the 89th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Intel chip has an average score of 43210, placing it in the 88th percentile. The AMD chip's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-13900HX (avg score 46098, 0.2% behind), the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 (46062, 0.3% behind), the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (46030, 0.3% behind), and the AMD EPYC 4364P (45970, 0.5% behind). The Intel chip's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 (43326, 0.3% ahead), the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465 (43431, 0.5% ahead), the Intel Core i9-12900 (42906, 0.7% behind), and the Intel Core i9-12900KF (42830, 0.9% behind).

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field in the database. Core count: 6 for AMD versus 16 for Intel. Thread count: 12 for AMD versus 16 for Intel. Base clock: 2.00 GHz for AMD versus 2.10 GHz for Intel. Boost clock: 4.80 GHz for AMD versus 4.90 GHz for Intel. TDP: 65 watts for AMD versus 25 watts for Intel. Socket: AMD Socket AM5 versus Intel BGA 2540.

Process node: 4 nm for AMD (TSMC) versus 3 nm for Intel (Intel foundry). Die size: 195 mm² for AMD, no data for Intel. L1 cache: 80 KB per core for AMD versus 192 KB per core for Intel. L2 cache: 1 MB per core for AMD versus 2.5 MB per core for Intel. L3 cache: 8 MB for AMD versus 18 MB shared for Intel.

Memory support: DDR5 for AMD versus DDR5 and LPDDR5X for Intel. Memory bandwidth: 89.6 GB/s for AMD versus 115.2 GB/s for Intel. ECC memory: supported on AMD, not on Intel. PCIe: Gen 4 with 12 lanes for AMD versus Gen 5 with 12 lanes for Intel. Integrated graphics: Radeon 840M for AMD versus Intel Xe3 Graphics for Intel.

Market segment: Desktop for AMD versus Mobile for Intel. Release date: 2026-02-28 for AMD versus 2026-01-04 for Intel. Multiplier unlocked: yes for AMD, no for Intel. Part number: 100-000001918 for AMD versus SA4R5Q9EH for Intel. Neither part has a recorded launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 440G has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel part does not use simultaneous multithreading, so its thread count equals its core count, while the AMD part doubles its threads via SMT.

Q: What is the single-thread performance difference?

A: The Intel chip scores 4218 in PassMark single-thread tests, while the AMD chip scores 4060. This gives Intel a 3.7% lead, the smallest margin of any head-to-head benchmark in the database.

Q: How do the cache sizes compare?

A: The AMD chip has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of L3. The Intel chip has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. Intel's L3 cache is more than double AMD's.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel chip supports dual-channel DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The AMD chip supports dual-channel DDR5 only with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. Intel's bandwidth is approximately 28.6% higher.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 440G supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H does not.

Q: What are the market segments for these processors?

A: The AMD chip is a desktop processor using AMD Socket AM5. The Intel chip is a mobile processor using Intel BGA 2540. The Intel part also has a lower TDP of 25 watts versus 65 watts for the AMD part.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion: the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H is the faster processor in every measured head-to-head benchmark. The Intel part wins all 11 tests, with margins from 3.7% in single-thread performance to 73.6% in prime number computation. The 16-core design provides a decisive advantage in multithreaded workloads, while the 3 nm process and higher boost clock contribute to a small but consistent lead in single-thread tests.

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 440G is not without its strengths in the database. It sits in a higher overall percentile (89th versus 88th) and has a higher average benchmark score (46187 versus 43210), driven by its full suite of tests. It supports ECC memory, has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, and uses a desktop socket with a larger die size of 195 mm². For users who prioritize ECC support or manual overclocking, the AMD part offers capabilities the Intel chip lacks.

However, for raw performance across the recorded workloads, the Intel chip is the superior choice. The multithread advantage is substantial, with a 33.7% lead in PassMark multithread, a 57.9% lead in floating point math, and a 56.1% lead in physics. Even in integer math, where the AMD chip's Zen 5 cores should be competitive, Intel holds an 18.4% edge. The single-thread gap is small enough to be negligible in real-world lightly threaded applications, but it still favors Intel.

The TDP difference is notable: the Intel chip delivers higher performance across the board while consuming 25 watts versus 65 watts for the AMD chip. This efficiency gap, combined with the performance lead, makes the Intel part the stronger choice for mobile platforms, while the AMD part targets desktop builds where its socket, ECC support, and unlocked multiplier may be more relevant. The benchmark data does not support any scenario where the AMD chip outperforms the Intel chip in the tested workloads.