AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap between the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 and the Intel Core Ultra 9 285. Across all fifteen head-to-head comparisons, the Intel part takes the win, with the AMD processor trailing by margins ranging from roughly one-fifth to more than four-fifths.

The largest single-core deficit appears in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 scores 6909 against the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350's 1958, a delta of -71.7%. The R23 multicore result tells a similar story: Intel posts 48945 versus AMD's 16014.5, a -67.3% gap. In the older Cinebench R15 suite, the Intel part leads multicore by 4933 to 2477 (-49.8%) and single-core by 696 to 294 (-57.8%).

PassMark results reinforce the pattern. The widest margin in the entire dataset is PassMark find prime numbers, where Intel scores 459 and AMD scores 80, a -82.6% delta. Floating point math also shows a large separation: Intel at 194988 versus AMD at 53230, a -72.7% gap. Data encryption follows at -67.5% (46949 versus 15244), and physics testing shows -62.5% (3598 versus 1349).

The narrowest gap is in PassMark single-thread performance. Here Intel scores 4881 and AMD scores 3834, a -21.5% delta. This remains a clear Intel win, but it is the closest the AMD part gets in any measured workload. Integer math (-48%), data compression (-49.5%), and extended instructions (-52.2%) all fall in the middle range. Random string sorting (-54.8%) and PassMark multithread (-55.9%) complete the sweep.

In absolute terms, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 delivers roughly double the AMD processor's output in several tests. Data compression shows 602121 versus 304089, while integer math shows 164869 versus 85651. The average benchmark score for the Intel part is 75488, compared to 34222 for the AMD part, placing the Intel processor in the 95th percentile of all CPUs versus the AMD's 84th percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design families. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 uses the Zen 5 architecture under the Krackan Point codename, part of the Ryzen AI 300 generation that mixes Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. It packs 8 cores and 16 threads on a 4 nm TSMC process with a 195 mm² die. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, using the Arrow Lake architecture (Arrow Lake-S codename) on a 3 nm TSMC process with a 243 mm² die and 17,800 million transistors.

Core counts differ sharply. The Intel part has 24 cores and 24 threads, while the AMD part has 8 cores and 16 threads. Intel's threading model does not add extra threads per core, whereas AMD's SMT implementation doubles thread count. Cache hierarchies also diverge. AMD provides 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 8 MB L3. Intel provides 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and a shared 36 MB L3, a substantially larger pool.

Clock speeds favor Intel as well. The AMD base clock is 2.00 GHz with a 5.00 GHz boost, while the Intel base clock is 2.50 GHz and boost reaches 5.60 GHz. Thermal design power differs by more than double: 28 W for AMD versus 65 W for Intel, consistent with the Intel part being a desktop-class processor and the AMD part being mobile-oriented.

Memory support shows both common ground and divergence. Both use DDR5 with dual-channel buses, but AMD also supports LPDDR5X while Intel lists only DDR5. Memory bandwidth favors Intel at 102.4 GB/s versus AMD's 89.6 GB/s. Intel supports ECC memory; AMD does not. PCIe capabilities also differ: Intel offers Gen 5 with 20 lanes, AMD offers Gen 4 with 16 lanes.

Integrated graphics differ in branding and configuration. The AMD part uses the Radeon 860M, while Intel uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. Both are active production parts. The AMD release date is 2025-01-05, and the Intel release date is 2024-12-31, placing them in adjacent release windows. The Intel part carries a launch MSRP of $579. The AMD part has no listed launch MSRP. Both have locked multipliers, and neither offers an unlocked overclocking path.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear segmentation rather than a direct competition. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 wins every measured benchmark, and the margins are often large. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Intel part delivers roughly three times the AMD score. In PassMark floating point, the Intel result is nearly four times higher. For workloads that stress many cores, high throughput, or encryption and compression, the Intel processor is the dominant choice based strictly on recorded performance.

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 350, however, occupies a different niche. Its 28 W TDP and mobile socket (AMD Socket FP8) indicate a power-conscious design aimed at laptops and portable systems. The Intel part uses Intel Socket 1851 and a 65 W TDP, aligning with desktop use. A buyer choosing between these two would be deciding between a compact mobile processor and a high-end desktop processor, not between two equivalents.

For single-threaded tasks, the Intel part still leads, but the -21.5% gap in PassMark single-thread is the smallest margin. That suggests the AMD architecture holds up better in lightly threaded scenarios relative to its own multicore weakness. Still, the Intel part wins outright, and no benchmark in the dataset shows the AMD part ahead.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 | Intel Core Ultra 9 285 |

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

| Cores | 8 | 24 |

| Threads | 16 | 24 |

| Base clock | 2.00 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.00 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 |

| Process node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Transistors | Not listed | 17,800 million |

| Die size | 195 mm² | 243 mm² |

| 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 bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| ECC memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 Lanes | Gen 5, 20 Lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon 860M | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |

| Market segment | Mobile | Desktop |

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

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | $579 |

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has 24 cores, while the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 has 8 cores. Intel also leads in threads with 24 versus 16.

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

A: The largest delta is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Intel part scores 459 versus the AMD part's 80, a -82.6% difference.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No, both have locked multipliers. The multiplierUnlocked field is false for each processor.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 supports ECC memory. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 does not.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has an average benchmark score of 75488, placing it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 has an average score of 34222, placing it in the 84th percentile.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 supports DDR5 only. Both use dual-channel memory buses.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 wins in every recorded benchmark, so the practical question is where the AMD part offers relative strengths rather than outright victories. The narrowest Intel margin is PassMark single-thread at -21.5%, indicating the AMD Zen 5 architecture compresses the gap most in lightly threaded work. For users prioritizing portability and low power draw, the AMD part's 28 W TDP and mobile socket make it the sensible option, even though the data shows no performance win.

The Intel part dominates multithreaded throughput. Cinebench R23 multicore shows a 48945 versus 16014.5 result, and PassMark multithread shows 56602 versus 24935. It also excels in math-heavy workloads: floating point math (194988 versus 53230), integer math (164869 versus 85651), and prime number finding (459 versus 80). Data compression and encryption also favor Intel heavily, with 602121 versus 304089 and 46949 versus 15244 respectively.

For desktop users with access to a 65 W power envelope, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 provides the higher ceiling across the board. For mobile users who need a capable processor in a low-power package, the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 offers the necessary efficiency profile, with the caveat that its performance metrics trail Intel in every measured category. The choice hinges on platform and power constraints, not on benchmark superiority, which belongs entirely to Intel.