AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is unequivocal: the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 wins every single recorded head-to-head test, claiming 15 wins against zero for the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340. The largest margin comes in the PassMark find prime numbers test, where Intel leads by 83.9%, scoring 459 versus 74. The floating point math test shows a 79.7% advantage for Intel (194988 vs 39662), and the data encryption test records a 76.1% gap (46949 vs 11212).

Multi-threaded workloads paint a similarly lopsided picture. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel part scores 48945 against AMD's 11534, a 76.4% deficit. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a 64.7% gap (4933 vs 1743). The PassMark multi-thread test records 56602 for Intel versus 19215 for AMD, a 66.1% difference. Physics simulation results indicate a 69.9% gap (3598 vs 1084).

Single-thread performance tells a different story in magnitude. The closest contest in the entire dataset is PassMark single-thread, where Intel scores 4881 against AMD's 3758, a 23% advantage. Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 73.9% gap (6909 vs 1802), while Cinebench R15 single-core records a 60.3% difference (696 vs 276). Despite the smaller single-thread margin, Intel still holds a decisive lead.

Data-centric workloads follow the trend. Data compression gives Intel 602121 versus 221581, a 63.2% edge. Random string sorting shows a 67% gap (73651 vs 24334). Extended instructions score 45357 for Intel and 15721 for AMD, a 65.3% difference. Integer math records 164869 versus 63233, a 61.6% gap. The overall average benchmark scores confirm the hierarchy: Intel at 75488 versus AMD at 27932, placing Intel in the 95th percentile of all CPUs compared to AMD's 80th percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two processors occupy entirely different design spaces. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 is a mobile chip built on the Zen 5 architecture with the Krackan Point codename, part of the Ryzen AI PRO 300 generation that combines Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. It uses a 4 nm process from TSMC with a die size of 195 mm². The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 is a desktop part from the Core Ultra Series 2, using Arrow Lake architecture with the Arrow Lake-S codename. Intel employs a 3 nm TSMC process with a larger 243 mm² die and 17,800 million transistors.

Core configuration differs fundamentally. AMD provides 6 cores and 12 threads, while Intel provides 24 cores and 24 threads, meaning Intel does not use simultaneous multithreading. Clock speeds favor Intel: base clock of 2.50 GHz versus 2.00 GHz, and boost clock of 5.60 GHz versus 4.80 GHz. Thermal design power is 65 watts for Intel and 28 watts for AMD, reflecting the desktop versus mobile positioning.

Cache hierarchies are very different in scale. AMD uses 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of L3 cache. Intel uses 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and a much larger 36 MB of shared L3 cache. This cache advantage contributes to Intel's dominance in data-heavy workloads.

Memory support shows both commonalities and differences. Both support DDR5 and dual-channel memory, with ECC capability. AMD adds LPDDR5X support, while Intel is limited to DDR5. Memory bandwidth favors Intel at 102.4 GB/s versus AMD's 89.6 GB/s. PCIe connectivity also differs: Intel provides Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes, while AMD provides Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics differ as well. AMD uses the Radeon 840M, while Intel uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. Sockets are incompatible: AMD uses Socket FP8, Intel uses Socket 1851. The market segments are distinct, with AMD classified as mobile and Intel as desktop.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data gives Intel a clean sweep across every benchmark category. For multi-threaded productivity, Cinebench R23 multi-core at 48945 versus 11534 indicates Intel handles heavily parallel workloads with far greater throughput. The PassMark multi-thread score of 56602 confirms this for general multithreaded applications.

Single-thread responsiveness also favors Intel, though by a smaller margin. The PassMark single-thread score of 4881 versus 3758 shows a 23% advantage, the smallest gap in the dataset. This suggests that for lightly threaded tasks, the Intel part still leads, but the performance difference is less extreme than in multi-threaded scenarios.

Data compression and encryption workloads heavily favor Intel. The 602121 compression score versus 221581 represents a 63.2% lead, while encryption at 46949 versus 11212 shows a 76.1% gap. These results indicate Intel's advantage in memory-intensive and cryptographic operations. The extended instructions score of 45357 versus 15721, a 65.3% gap, points to superior SIMD and specialized instruction handling.

Floating point and integer math both show large Intel leads. Floating point math at 194988 versus 39662 (79.7% gap) and integer math at 164869 versus 63233 (61.6% gap) demonstrate Intel's computational throughput advantage. Physics simulation results, 3598 versus 1084, show a 69.9% gap, relevant to scientific computing and physics-based workloads.

Prime number finding, a test sensitive to both clock speed and cache efficiency, shows Intel's largest margin at 83.9% (459 vs 74). Random string sorting at 73651 versus 24334 (67% gap) rounds out the dataset, showing Intel's memory subsystem advantage in sorting tasks.

The Verdict

The data supports only one conclusion: the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 is the superior processor by every measured metric. Its 95th percentile ranking versus AMD's 80th percentile, combined with an average benchmark score of 75488 versus 27932, places it in a different performance class. The Intel part wins all 15 head-to-head tests, with margins ranging from 23% to 83.9%.

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340, despite its lower scores, serves a different purpose. As a mobile processor with a 28 watt TDP, it targets power-constrained environments where the Intel part's 65 watt TDP would be impractical. The AMD chip's 6 cores and 12 threads, Zen 5 architecture, and 4 nm process provide adequate performance for its mobile segment, but it cannot compete with Intel's desktop-class 24-core configuration.

For users prioritizing raw performance in desktop workloads, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 is the clear choice. Its 24 cores, 36 MB L3 cache, 5.60 GHz boost clock, and higher memory bandwidth deliver benchmark results that dwarf the AMD part. The recorded data shows no scenario where the AMD processor outperforms Intel, even in single-thread tests where the gap is smallest.

The AMD processor remains relevant only for mobile systems where the 28 watt TDP and Socket FP8 form factor matter more than absolute performance. Its 80th percentile ranking indicates solid mid-range capability, but the head-to-head data provides no evidence of competitive advantage over the Intel part. The verdict from the measurements is unambiguous: Intel wins on every front, with the only AMD advantage being its power envelope and mobile orientation.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has 24 cores and 24 threads, while the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 has 6 cores and 12 threads. Intel does not use simultaneous multithreading, so its thread count equals its core count.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest gap is in the PassMark find prime numbers test, where Intel leads by 83.9%, scoring 459 versus AMD's 74. The smallest gap is in PassMark single-thread, where Intel leads by 23% (4881 vs 3758).

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 and the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 support ECC memory. Both also support DDR5 and dual-channel memory configurations.

Q: What are the process nodes for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 uses a 3 nm process, also from TSMC. Intel's die size is 243 mm² compared to AMD's 195 mm².

Q: How do the cache sizes compare?

A: Intel has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. AMD has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of L3 cache. Intel's larger cache contributes to its performance lead.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has higher memory bandwidth at 102.4 GB/s, while the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 provides 89.6 GB/s. Intel also supports PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes, whereas AMD supports PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 | Intel Core Ultra 9 285 |

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

| Cores | 6 | 24 |

| Threads | 12 | 24 |

| Base Clock | 2.00 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.80 GHz | 5.60 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Arrow Lake |

| Codename | Krackan Point | Arrow Lake-S |

| Generation | Ryzen AI PRO 300 (Zen 5 / Zen 5c) | Ultra 9 (Arrow Lake) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Die Size | 195 mm² | 243 mm² |

| Transistors | Not specified | 17,800 million |

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

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

| L3 Cache | 8 MB | 36 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Dual-channel |

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

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 840M | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2025-01-05 | 2024-12-31 |

| Launch MSRP | Not specified | $579 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | No |