AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 338H Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded benchmark data shows a decisive overall performance advantage for the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H. Across all 11 head-to-head PassMark comparisons, the Intel processor wins every single test. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 does not claim a single victory in the measured workload suite. The Intel part delivers an 11.2% higher single-thread score (4180 versus 3713) and a 32.9% higher multithread score (28717 versus 19262). The database positions the AMD part at the 86th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel part sits at the 84th percentile, but the raw workload results consistently favor Intel. The average benchmark score for the AMD part is 37804, while the Intel part averages 33989, a gap driven by the Intel part's inclusion of Cinebench results in its average. For any workload represented by these PassMark tests, the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H is the stronger choice. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 remains a valid option only where its specific platform features (ECC memory, AMD Socket FP8, Radeon 840M graphics) are required, since the performance data itself does not favor it.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different foundries and process nodes. AMD builds the Ryzen AI Embedded P132 on a 4 nm node at TSMC, using the Gorgon Point codename and a generation labeled "Ryzen AI Embedded (Zen 5 / Zen 5c)". Intel builds the Core Ultra 5 338H on a 3 nm node at its own foundry, using the Panther Lake architecture and the Panther Lake-H generation, part of the Core Ultra Series 3. The AMD part uses 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel part uses 12 cores and 12 threads. The thread count is equal, but the core distribution differs: Intel achieves 12 threads from 12 physical cores, whereas AMD achieves 12 threads from 6 cores with simultaneous multithreading.

Cache layouts differ substantially. AMD allocates 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of L3. Intel allocates 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The larger L3 on the Intel part, 18 MB versus 4 MB, represents a significant capacity difference for workloads that reuse data sets. Process node differences also matter: Intel's 3 nm node is one step ahead of AMD's 4 nm node in the recorded process geometry.

Memory support diverges. The AMD part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory with dual-channel access, and it enables ECC memory. The Intel part supports only LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, and does not support ECC memory. Memory bandwidth is higher on the Intel side at 136.5 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s for AMD. PCIe connectivity differs as well: AMD offers Gen 4 with 14 CPU lanes, while Intel offers Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics also differ: AMD uses the Radeon 840M, while Intel uses the Arc B370. The Intel part has a higher boost clock at 4.70 GHz versus 4.50 GHz, while the AMD part has a slightly higher base clock at 2.00 GHz versus 1.90 GHz. TDP ratings are close, with AMD at 28 watts and Intel at 25 watts.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H wins every recorded comparison, but the margins vary widely by workload. The smallest margin appears in integer math, where Intel scores 64934 against AMD's 62249, a 4.1% advantage. This indicates that in pure integer arithmetic, the two processors are closely matched. The largest margin appears in prime number finding, where Intel scores 304 against AMD's 57, an 81.2% advantage. This is an extreme outlier and suggests the Intel architecture handles that specific workload far more efficiently.

Floating-point math shows a 49.7% advantage for Intel (84067 versus 42248). Physics simulation shows a 62.1% advantage for Intel (2697 versus 1022). Multithread performance shows a 32.9% advantage for Intel (28717 versus 19262). Data compression shows a 16.7% advantage for Intel (276539 versus 230437). Data encryption shows a 46.4% advantage for Intel (21367 versus 11444). Extended instructions show a 30.9% advantage for Intel (23906 versus 16520). Random string sorting shows a 26.1% advantage for Intel (34082 versus 25181). Single-thread performance shows an 11.2% advantage for Intel (4180 versus 3713).

The AMD part's closest result is the 4.1% deficit in integer math, and its second-closest is the 11.2% deficit in single-thread. Beyond those two tests, every other deficit exceeds 16%. The data shows a pattern: AMD remains competitive in integer-heavy single-thread work, but loses decisively in memory-bandwidth-sensitive and multi-threaded workloads. The Intel part's higher memory bandwidth (136.5 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s) likely explains part of the compression and sorting margins, though the database does not provide direct causality, only the concurrent measurements.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in every major specification field recorded. AMD uses 6 cores and 12 threads; Intel uses 12 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks are 2.00 GHz for AMD and 1.90 GHz for Intel. Boost clocks are 4.50 GHz for AMD and 4.70 GHz for Intel. TDP is 28 watts for AMD and 25 watts for Intel. Sockets differ: AMD uses Socket FP8, Intel uses BGA 2540. Process nodes differ: AMD uses 4 nm at TSMC, Intel uses 3 nm at its own foundry. Cache differs per core and total: AMD has 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 4 MB L3; Intel has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB shared L3. Memory support differs: AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, Intel supports only LPDDR5X. ECC support differs: AMD supports ECC memory, Intel does not. Memory bandwidth differs: AMD has 89.6 GB/s, Intel has 136.5 GB/s. PCIe differs: AMD has Gen 4 with 14 CPU lanes, Intel has Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics differ: AMD uses Radeon 840M, Intel uses Arc B370. Release dates differ: AMD released on 2026-03-08, Intel released on 2026-01-04. The Intel part has a known part number (SA4REQ9EW), while the AMD part's part number is unknown. Neither processor has a recorded launch MSRP, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has 12 cores, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 has 6 cores. Both processors have 12 threads.

Q: Does the AMD processor support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H does not support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 has a boost clock of 4.50 GHz.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor have?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 has 4 MB of L3 cache. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor wins the single-thread benchmark?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H wins the single-thread benchmark with a score of 4180, which is 11.2% higher than the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132's score of 3713.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has a memory bandwidth of 136.5 GB/s, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 has a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H wins in all 11 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The largest advantages occur in prime number finding (81.2% ahead), physics simulation (62.1% ahead), and floating-point math (49.7% ahead). The Intel part also leads in data encryption by 46.4%, multithread performance by 32.9%, extended instructions by 30.9%, random string sorting by 26.1%, data compression by 16.7%, single-thread performance by 11.2%, and integer math by 4.1%. The Intel part's 12-core design, larger L3 cache (18 MB versus 4 MB), higher memory bandwidth (136.5 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s), and higher boost clock (4.70 GHz versus 4.50 GHz) align with its benchmark dominance.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 does not win any recorded benchmark. Its closest performance comes in integer math, where it trails by only 4.1%, and in single-thread performance, where it trails by 11.2%. The AMD part's advantages are platform-level rather than performance-level: it supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, it supports ECC memory, it offers 14 PCIe Gen 4 lanes (versus 4 Gen 5 lanes on Intel), and it uses the AMD Socket FP8. The AMD part also has a slightly higher base clock (2.00 GHz versus 1.90 GHz) and a higher TDP (28 watts versus 25 watts). For workloads that require ECC memory or a broader set of PCIe lanes, the AMD part provides those capabilities, but the recorded benchmark data shows no workload where it outperforms the Intel processor. The database's nearest rival comparisons place the AMD part near the Intel Core 5 211E, AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435, AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, and Intel Core i9-14901E, while the Intel part sits near the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H, Intel Core i7-12800HX, Intel Xeon 6353P, and AMD EPYC 4244P. The Intel part's average benchmark score of 33989 includes Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 results, which are not recorded for the AMD part, so the average score comparison reflects different test sets. The head-to-head PassMark suite, which is identical for both, remains the cleanest basis for comparison, and it favors Intel in every test.