AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U vs Intel Core Ultra 9 386H Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has 16 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What are the base and boost clock speeds?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U runs at a base clock of 3.50 GHz and boosts to 4.90 GHz. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and also boosts to 4.90 GHz.

Q: Which processor has ECC memory support?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H does not support ECC memory.

Q: How do the two processors compare in terms of manufacturing process?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H uses a 3 nm process at Intel.

Q: What memory types are supported by each?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U supports DDR5 memory. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory.

Q: What are the PCIe capabilities of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U provides PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H provides PCIe Gen 5 with 12 lanes (CPU only).

The Verdict

The recorded data positions the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H as the clear performance leader. Its average benchmark score of 43210 places it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U, with no recorded benchmark scores and a 50th percentile ranking, lacks any measured performance data to compare directly.

Benchmark results for the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H show strong multi-threaded capability. In Cinebench R23 multicore, it scores 20547, and in PassMark multithread it scores 35399. Single-thread performance is also solid, with a Cinebench R23 singlecore score of 2071.5 and a PassMark single thread score of 4218. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U has no benchmark entries in the database, so its actual performance cannot be verified.

The choice depends on available data. For anyone requiring verified performance metrics, only the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has recorded results. The AMD part offers ECC memory support, which the Intel part lacks, making it the only option for workloads that require error-correcting memory. The Intel processor delivers a higher memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s for the AMD part.

For applications that leverage many cores, the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H with 16 cores and 16 threads is the data-backed choice. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U has fewer cores and threads but includes SMT, giving it 12 threads from 6 cores. The Intel part also uses a newer 3 nm process compared to the 4 nm process of the AMD chip.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U has a higher base clock of 3.50 GHz versus 2.10 GHz for the Intel part, but both boost to the same 4.90 GHz. The Intel processor has a larger L3 cache at 18 MB shared, compared to 16 MB shared on the AMD processor.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries between the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U and the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H. The AMD processor has an empty benchmarks array, meaning no scores are recorded for any test. The Intel processor has a full suite of 17 recorded benchmark results.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H delivers a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 20547, and a Cinebench R20 multicore score of 12820. In Cinebench R15 multicore, it scores 3223. The single-core results are equally consistent: Cinebench R23 singlecore at 2071.5, Cinebench R20 singlecore at 1809, and Cinebench R15 singlecore at 303.5.

PassMark results for the Intel part show a multithread score of 35399, a single thread score of 4218, and a physics score of 3028. Integer math scores 87284, floating point math scores 108527, and extended instructions score 29138. Data compression scores 352365, data encryption scores 27150, and random string sorting scores 42135. Prime number finding scores 341.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H sits among close rivals in the database. It trails the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 by 0.3% and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465 by 0.5%. It leads the Intel Core i9-12900 by 0.7% and the Intel Core i9-12900KF by 0.9%. These narrow margins indicate the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H performs at the level of established desktop processors.

Without any recorded benchmarks for the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U, no direct comparison of scores is possible. The only measurable comparison is the 88th percentile ranking of the Intel part versus the 50th percentile ranking of the AMD part. The Intel processor also has an average benchmark score of 43210, while the AMD processor has an average benchmark score of 0.

Specification Differences

The core counts differ substantially. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has 16 cores and 16 threads. This gives the Intel part more parallel execution resources, while the AMD part relies on simultaneous multithreading to reach 12 threads.

Base clocks differ. The AMD part runs at 3.50 GHz, significantly higher than the Intel part at 2.10 GHz. Both processors share the same 4.90 GHz boost clock.

Thermal design power is close. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U has a TDP of 28 watts, and the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has a TDP of 25 watts. The difference is 3 watts.

The sockets are different. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP8, while the Intel part uses Intel BGA 2540.

Memory bandwidth favors the Intel part. It supports 115.2 GB/s, compared to 89.6 GB/s for the AMD part. Both use dual-channel memory buses. The Intel part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the AMD part supports only DDR5.

PCIe generations differ. The AMD part provides PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes. The Intel part provides PCIe Gen 5 with 12 lanes.

Integrated graphics differ. The AMD part uses Radeon 760M, and the Intel part uses Intel Xe3 Graphics.

Release dates differ. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U released on 2024-04-01, and the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H released on 2026-01-04.

The Intel part has a part number of SA4R5Q9EH. The AMD part number is unknown. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U uses the Zen 4 architecture under the Hawk Point codename, part of the Ryzen Embedded 8000 series. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H uses the Panther Lake architecture, part of the Core Ultra Series 3 and the Ultra 9 Panther Lake-H generation.

Process nodes differ. The AMD part is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel part uses a 3 nm process at Intel. The AMD part has 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The Intel part has no transistor count or die size recorded in the database.

Cache configurations differ. The AMD part has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache.

ECC memory support is exclusive to the AMD part. The Intel part does not support ECC memory, which is a meaningful distinction for embedded and reliability-focused workloads.

The market segment for both is Mobile, and both are in active production. The Intel part starts with a newer architecture generation, Panther Lake, compared to the Hawk Point of the AMD part.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H wins in every measured benchmark category, since the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U has no recorded scores. The Intel part shows strength in multi-threaded workloads with 16 cores, delivering a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 20547 and a PassMark multithread score of 35399. These results indicate strong performance for heavily parallel tasks.

The Intel part also wins in memory bandwidth. Its 115.2 GB/s support exceeds the 89.6 GB/s of the AMD part. The Intel part also supports LPDDR5X memory in addition to DDR5, giving it broader memory flexibility.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U wins on ECC memory support. This is the only functional area where the AMD part holds an advantage over the Intel part. For embedded systems that require error correction, the AMD part is the only option between the two.

The AMD part also has a higher base clock of 3.50 GHz versus 2.10 GHz for the Intel part. This suggests potential efficiency in lightly threaded tasks, though no benchmark data confirms this.

The AMD part provides more PCIe lanes at 20 lanes of PCIe Gen 4, compared to 12 lanes of PCIe Gen 5 on the Intel part. The Intel part uses the newer PCIe generation, which may offer higher per-lane bandwidth.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has a larger L3 cache at 18 MB versus 16 MB, and larger per-core L1 and L2 caches. The Intel part also uses a smaller 3 nm process node compared to the 4 nm node of the AMD part.

For workloads requiring verified performance, the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H is the data-backed choice. For workloads requiring ECC memory, the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8640U is the only option. The Intel part also sits in the 88th percentile of all CPUs, while the AMD part sits at the 50th percentile with no benchmark support.