AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF Comparison

AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF has 20 cores and 20 threads. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 also has 10 cores and 20 threads, using simultaneous multithreading to reach the same thread count.

Q: What is the difference in process node?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 uses a 4 nm process from TSMC. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF uses a 3 nm process, also from TSMC.

Q: Which CPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF boosts up to 5.50 GHz. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 boosts up to 5.00 GHz.

Q: Do both processors support DDR5 memory?

A: Yes, both support DDR5. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 also supports LPDDR5X, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF supports only DDR5.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 includes Radeon 880M integrated graphics. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF has no integrated graphics (N/A).

Q: What is the market segment for each?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 is a mobile processor. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF is a desktop processor.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 is built on the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Strix Point, and belongs to the Ryzen AI 300 generation. It uses a hybrid arrangement of Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. The chip is manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 233 mm². The cache layout includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF uses the Arrow Lake architecture, specifically Arrow Lake-S, and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 generation. It is built on a 3 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 243 mm² and 17,800 million transistors. The cache structure is larger: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache.

Memory support differs. The AMD part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus, with memory bandwidth rated at 89.6 GB/s. The Intel part supports only DDR5, also dual-channel, but with higher bandwidth at 102.4 GB/s. PCIe connectivity also differs: the AMD chip provides Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes, while the Intel chip provides Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes. The Intel processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the AMD processor does not.

The AMD processor integrates Radeon 880M graphics, making it suitable for systems without a discrete GPU. The Intel processor has no integrated graphics, requiring a separate graphics card. The AMD chip is a mobile part on Socket FP8, while the Intel chip is a desktop part on Socket 1851. TDP ratings are 28 W for the AMD and 125 W for the Intel, reflecting their different usage contexts.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows the Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, taking 17 out of 17 tests. The average benchmark score for the Intel chip is 71,910, placing it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 has an average score of 40,048, placing it in the 87th percentile. The gap is substantial, with the Intel part outperforming the AMD part by roughly 79% in average score.

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 is a mobile processor with integrated graphics and a 28 W TDP. It makes sense for portable systems where power efficiency and an iGPU matter. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF is a desktop processor with no integrated graphics, a 125 W TDP, and an unlocked multiplier. It delivers far higher multi-threaded and single-threaded performance, as shown by the benchmark results.

For users building a desktop workstation or high-performance PC, the data points clearly to the Intel chip. For a laptop or a compact system where integrated graphics and lower power draw are priorities, the AMD chip is the only option in this comparison. The choice depends entirely on the form factor and performance requirements.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 | Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF |

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

| Cores | 10 | 20 |

| Threads | 20 | 20 |

| Base Clock | 2.00 GHz | 3.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 5.50 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 125 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Arrow Lake |

| Codename | Strix Point | Arrow Lake-S |

| Generation | Ryzen AI 300 (Zen 5 / Zen 5c) | Ultra 7 (Arrow Lake) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Die Size | 233 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 | 16 MB | 30 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR5 |

| 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 880M | N/A |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Launch MSRP | None | $379 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF dominates the recorded benchmark suite. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel chip scores 49,736 against the AMD's 18,698, a delta of 62.4% in Intel's favor. Single-core in R23 shows an even larger gap: 7,021 versus 1,992, a 71.6% difference. Cinebench R15 multi-core results are 5,013 for Intel and 2,842 for AMD, a 43.3% lead. R15 single-core is 707 versus 303, a 57.1% margin.

Geekbench multi-core shows Intel at 22,913 and AMD at 13,760, a 39.9% difference. Single-core is closer but still favors Intel: 2,759 versus 2,253, an 18.3% gap. Passmark integer math shows Intel at 143,351 and AMD at 101,831, a 29% lead. Floating-point math is a large win for Intel: 189,431 versus 62,802, a 66.8% difference. Data compression scores are 666,589 for Intel and 354,510 for AMD, a 46.8% margin. Data encryption is 48,198 for Intel and 18,297 for AMD, a 62% difference.

Extended instructions favor Intel heavily: 54,513 versus 25,113, a 53.9% lead. Find prime numbers shows Intel at 486 and AMD at 117, a 75.9% gap. Passmark physics is 3,633 for Intel and 1,704 for AMD, a 53.1% margin. Random string sorting is 79,735 versus 39,447, a 50.5% difference. Passmark multi-thread score is 58,518 for Intel and 29,467 for AMD, a 49.6% gap. Single-thread is 4,928 versus 3,841, a 22.1% margin.

The nearest rival data confirms the positioning. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 sits near the AMD Ryzen 7 7700, with a delta of 0.1%, and the Intel Core 5 221E at 0.2%. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF sits near the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX, with a delta of 0.2%, and the Intel Xeon 6517P at 0.6%. The two CPUs are far apart in the performance hierarchy.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF wins in every measured category. The largest margins are in find prime numbers (75.9% lead), Cinebench R23 single-core (71.6%), and floating-point math (66.8%). These results indicate strong integer and floating-point throughput, making the Intel chip well suited for compute-heavy desktop workloads such as rendering, scientific simulation, and complex data processing. The single-core advantage also helps in lightly threaded applications and responsive general desktop use.

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 has no benchmark wins in this dataset. However, its integrated Radeon 880M graphics means it can operate in systems without a discrete GPU, which the Intel chip cannot. The lower 28 W TDP and mobile socket make it appropriate for laptops and other power-constrained platforms. The memory support for LPDDR5X also points to mobile or compact designs where low-power memory is used.

For desktop builders, the Intel chip offers the higher performance in every recorded test. For mobile users, the AMD chip provides a functional processor with built-in graphics and a much lower power envelope. The data does not show any scenario where the AMD chip outperforms the Intel chip in raw CPU benchmarks.