AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 336H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents an unusually one-sided comparison. Across all 15 recorded head-to-head tests, the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H wins every single matchup. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 secures zero wins. This is not a close contest by any measure. The largest gap appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where Intel scores 23991 against AMD's 10590, a delta of -55.9% from the AMD side. That means Intel delivers more than double the multi-threaded rendering performance in this specific workload.

Single-core performance tells a similar story, though with a smaller margin. In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel posts 3387 versus AMD's 1806, a -46.7% difference. The Cinebench R15 results follow the same pattern: Intel leads 2418 to 1723 in multi-core (-28.7%) and 341 to 254 in single-core (-25.5%). These are substantial gaps that point to a fundamental performance advantage for the Intel part across both lightly-threaded and heavily-threaded tasks.

PassMark's suite reinforces the trend. Data encryption shows Intel at 21291 against AMD's 10519, a -50.6% delta. Floating point math sees Intel at 82415 versus 39362, a -52.2% gap. The physics test is even more lopsided: Intel scores 2682, AMD manages 976, a -63.6% difference. Prime number finding is the most extreme outlier, with Intel at 299 and AMD at just 56, a -81.3% delta that suggests a very large advantage in integer-heavy, branch-intensive workloads.

Not every test shows a dramatic separation. PassMark integer math is the closest contest: Intel at 62070, AMD at 58332, a modest -6% difference. Single-thread performance in PassMark also stays relatively tight, with Intel at 4013 and AMD at 3591, a -10.5% gap. These narrower margins indicate that in certain scalar integer operations, the AMD architecture remains competitive. Random string sorting shows a -31.7% delta (34402 vs 23488), while extended instructions land at -35.5% (24542 vs 15826).

The aggregate data reflects this dominance. Intel's average benchmark score is 34485, placing it in the 84th percentile of all CPUs in the database. AMD's average is 26936, sitting at the 79th percentile. Intel's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-13700HX (-0.2% delta), the Intel Core i5-13450HX (+0.4%), the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X (+0.7%), and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 (+0.8%). AMD's nearest rivals are the Intel Core i7-1370P (+0.1%), AMD Ryzen 5 7545U (+0.3%), AMD Ryzen 7 5700G (-0.4%), and Intel Core i9-9900K (-0.6%). Both processors sit among capable competition, but the Intel part operates at a higher overall performance tier.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from fundamentally different design philosophies. AMD uses a 6-core, 12-thread configuration based on the Zen 5 architecture, manufactured on a 4 nm process by TSMC. The codename is Gorgon Point, part of the Ryzen AI 400 generation that mixes Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. Intel counters with a 16-core, 16-thread design using the Panther Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process at Intel's own foundries. This is a Core Ultra Series 3 part from the Panther Lake-H generation.

Core counts explain much of the performance disparity. Intel has 16 physical cores versus AMD's 6, and Intel does not use simultaneous multithreading, hence 16 threads. AMD relies on 6 cores with 12 threads. In heavily parallel workloads like Cinebench R23 multi-core, the extra physical cores give Intel a natural advantage. The 55.9% gap in that test aligns with the core count discrepancy.

Cache hierarchies differ sharply. AMD allocates 80 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, with only 4 MB of shared L3. Intel provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and a much larger 18 MB shared L3. The 14 MB difference in L3 capacity likely contributes to Intel's lead in data compression (280340 vs 215812) and random string sorting (34402 vs 23488), both of which benefit from larger caches.

Clock speeds are similar at the top end: both boost to 4.60 GHz. Base clocks differ slightly, with AMD at 2.00 GHz and Intel at 1.90 GHz. Power envelopes are close as well, with AMD rated at 28W TDP and Intel at 25W TDP. The process node difference, 4 nm TSMC versus 3 nm Intel, gives Intel a potential density and efficiency edge, though the higher core count likely offsets any per-core efficiency advantage.

Memory support is identical in type: both accept DDR5 and LPDDR5X with dual-channel buses. However, Intel's memory bandwidth is rated at 115.2 GB/s versus AMD's 89.6 GB/s. That 25.6 GB/s difference could influence memory-sensitive workloads. ECC memory is supported on the AMD side but not on Intel. PCIe generations differ: AMD uses Gen 4 with 14 lanes, Intel uses Gen 5 with 12 lanes. Intel's newer PCIe standard offers higher per-lane bandwidth, though AMD provides two additional lanes.

Integrated graphics also diverge. AMD pairs the CPU with Radeon 840M graphics, while Intel uses Xe3 Graphics. Neither part includes a discrete GPU, so iGPU performance matters for systems without add-in cards, though the database does not record iGPU benchmark scores for either chip.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H wins everywhere in the recorded data. There is no benchmark category where AMD comes out ahead. The practical question is how wide the margin is and what that means for different use cases.

For multi-threaded productivity, Intel dominates. Cinebench R23 multi-core at 23991 versus 10590 suggests rendering, video encoding, and 3D modeling workloads will run more than twice as fast on the Intel chip. PassMark multi-thread at 28545 versus 18115 (-36.5%) confirms the trend for general parallel workloads. Data compression and encryption, both common in file archiving and security tasks, show Intel leading by 23% and 50.6% respectively.

Single-threaded responsiveness also favors Intel, but by a smaller amount. Cinebench R23 single-core shows Intel at 3387 versus 1806, a 46.7% gap. PassMark single-thread shows 4013 versus 3591, a 10.5% gap. The discrepancy between these two tests suggests that Intel's advantage in lightly-threaded tasks varies by instruction mix. For everyday desktop responsiveness, the PassMark figure may be more representative, indicating a modest but real Intel lead.

The AMD chip does not win a single recorded category. Its closest relative performance comes in PassMark integer math, where it trails by only 6%. That means in pure integer arithmetic, the two chips are nearly comparable. The AMD part also stays within 10.5% in PassMark single-thread, showing that its Zen 5 cores are competitive in scalar work. But in every other test, the gap widens substantially.

For users whose workloads involve floating point math, physics simulation, or prime number calculations, Intel's advantage is massive. Floating point math shows a 52.2% gap, physics a 63.6% gap, and prime numbers an 81.3% gap. These results point to Intel's wider core count and larger cache making a decisive difference in math-heavy tasks.

The Verdict

The recorded data supports a clear conclusion: the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H is the faster processor in every benchmark the database tracks. Its 84th percentile standing versus AMD's 79th percentile reflects a roughly five-percentile gap in overall performance. The average benchmark score difference, 34485 versus 26936, translates to a 28% higher aggregate score for Intel.

Users should select the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H when maximum multi-threaded performance is the priority. Rendering, compiling, data analysis, and any workload that scales across cores will benefit from its 16 physical cores and 18 MB of L3 cache. The Cinebench R23 multi-core result, more than double AMD's score, makes this the obvious choice for content creation and scientific computing.

Users should select the AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 when they need ECC memory support, which Intel lacks, or when they prefer AMD's Socket FP8 platform over Intel's BGA 2540. The AMD chip also consumes slightly more power (28W vs 25W), so it is not more efficient. Its 6 cores and 12 threads provide adequate performance for lighter tasks, and its PassMark integer math score comes within 6% of Intel, indicating competitive scalar throughput.

The Intel part also offers higher memory bandwidth (115.2 GB/s vs 89.6 GB/s), PCIe Gen 5 support versus Gen 4, and a larger L3 cache. These specifications align with its benchmark superiority. The AMD part is not without merit, but the data does not show any scenario where it outperforms Intel.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher multi-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: Intel Core Ultra 5 336H scores 23991, while AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 scores 10590. Intel leads by 55.9%.

Q: How do the single-core scores compare?

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 3387 versus AMD's 1806, a 46.7% advantage. PassMark single-thread shows Intel at 4013 and AMD at 3591, a 10.5% gap.

Q: What is the core and thread count for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H has 16 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 supports ECC memory. Intel Core Ultra 5 336H does not.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth ratings?

A: AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 has 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. Intel Core Ultra 5 336H has 115.2 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: Intel Core Ultra 5 336H has 18 MB shared L3 cache. AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 has 4 MB L3 cache.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 | Intel Core Ultra 5 336H |

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

| Cores | 6 | 16 |

| Threads | 12 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.00 GHz | 1.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.60 GHz | 4.60 GHz |

| TDP | 28W | 25W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Panther Lake |

| Codename | Gorgon Point | Panther Lake |

| Process Node | 4 nm (TSMC) | 3 nm (Intel) |

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

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 4 MB | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 115.2 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 14 Lanes | Gen 5, 12 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 840M | Intel Xe3 Graphics |

| Part Number | 100-000001935 | SA4RD |