AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data divides these two processors into distinct use cases. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus wins every recorded benchmark category, which is expected given its positioning as a desktop part with a much higher power envelope. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U, however, delivers its advantage in a different dimension: it achieves competitive per-core performance while operating within a dramatically lower power budget, making it the appropriate choice for embedded and mobile deployments where thermal and energy constraints dominate.

The Intel part wins decisively in multi-threaded workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 30867 versus the AMD processor's lack of recorded benchmark data in the database means the comparison relies on the Intel part's absolute performance. The PassMark multi-thread score of 51596 and the Cinebench R20 multi-core result of 18442 both confirm that the Intel chip handles heavily parallelized tasks, such as video rendering, scientific simulation, and compilation, with substantial headroom.

For single-threaded workloads, the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus also leads. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2261 and PassMark single-thread score of 4757 indicate strong per-core efficiency. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U has a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, which is lower than the Intel part's 5.30 GHz, and the database contains no benchmark scores for the AMD chip, so the recorded data exclusively favors Intel in every measurable test.

The AMD processor's win is in power efficiency and platform flexibility. With a 28 W TDP versus the Intel part's 125 W TDP, the Ryzen Embedded 8840U suits fanless or low-power embedded systems, industrial PCs, and compact mobile devices. The data shows no recorded benchmark scores for the AMD chip, so its performance class must be inferred from its architecture and clock specifications rather than measured results.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U uses the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Hawk Point, built on a 4 nm TSMC process with 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, enabling simultaneous multithreading. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus, from the Arrow Lake Refresh generation, uses an 18-core, 18-thread configuration without hyperthreading, built on a 3 nm TSMC process with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die.

Cache hierarchies differ significantly. The AMD part provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part offers 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel chip's larger aggregate cache, particularly the 30 MB L3, supports its multi-core workload advantage, while the AMD chip's smaller cache aligns with its lower-power embedded focus.

Memory support is another differentiator. Both support DDR5 and dual-channel memory, but the Intel part delivers 115.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth versus the AMD part's 89.6 GB/s. Both support ECC memory, which matters for reliability-sensitive embedded and server applications. The PCIe capabilities differ by generation: the AMD chip uses Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes, while the Intel chip uses Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes, offering double the per-lane bandwidth for high-speed peripherals.

Integrated graphics also diverge. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U includes the Radeon 780M, a capable integrated GPU for embedded visual workloads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus includes Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, which supports modern desktop graphics tasks. The AMD part's socket is AMD Socket FP8, a mobile/embedded package, while the Intel part uses Intel Socket 1851, a desktop platform. The Intel chip has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, while the AMD chip does not.

Process node differences are notable: Intel uses TSMC's 3 nm node versus AMD's 4 nm node. Despite the smaller node, the Intel die is larger at 243 mm² due to its higher core count and integrated memory controller complexity. The AMD chip's smaller die and lower transistor count reflect its efficiency-oriented design.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel part does not use simultaneous multithreading, so its thread count equals its core count.

Q: What are the power consumption differences?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U has a TDP of 28 W, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has a TDP of 125 W. The AMD chip consumes significantly less power, suiting embedded and mobile deployments, whereas the Intel chip requires robust desktop cooling.

Q: Which processor supports faster PCIe connectivity?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus supports PCIe Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U supports PCIe Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes. Gen 5 offers double the data rate per lane.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus support ECC memory, making both suitable for error-correcting workloads in embedded or server environments.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus delivers 115.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U provides 89.6 GB/s. Both use dual-channel DDR5 memory.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus boosts to 5.30 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U boosts to 5.10 GHz. The Intel part also has a higher base clock at 4.20 GHz versus 3.30 GHz.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U | Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus |

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

| Cores | 8 | 18 |

| Threads | 16 | 18 |

| Base Clock | 3.30 GHz | 4.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.10 GHz | 5.30 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 125 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Not specified in database |

| Codename | Hawk Point | Arrow Lake Refresh |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Transistors | 25,000 million | 17,800 million |

| Die Size | 178 mm² | 243 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 16 MB (shared) | 30 MB (shared) |

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

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 780M | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2024-04-01 | 2026-03-10 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Part Number | Unknown | SA4UZ |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains recorded benchmark scores only for the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus; the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U has no benchmark entries. Consequently, the head-to-head comparison is one-sided in recorded data.

The Intel part's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 30867 places it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score of 66855 positions it nearly even with the AMD EPYC 4465P, which scores 66925 with a delta of -0.1%, and the Intel Xeon 6515P at 67006 with a delta of -0.2%. The Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX scores 67469, just 0.9% higher, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 66159, 1.1% lower. These nearest rival comparisons show the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus sits in a tight performance cluster among high-end server and desktop processors.

In single-core performance, the Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2261 and the PassMark single-thread score of 4757 confirm strong per-core capability. The PassMark integer math score of 125091 and floating point math score of 162692 indicate balanced compute performance across both integer and floating-point workloads. The PassMark data compression score of 568721 and random string sorting score of 69090 demonstrate strong memory and cache subsystem performance.

The Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 4640 and R20 multi-core score of 18442 show consistent scaling across benchmark versions. The PassMark extended instructions score of 44565 and data encryption score of 42144 reflect robust SIMD and cryptographic processing. The find prime numbers score of 486 and physics score of 3494 are lower in absolute terms but still represent the Intel part's capabilities in those specific tests.

Since the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U has no recorded benchmark scores, the database cannot quantify its performance relative to the Intel part. The comparison must rely on architectural specifications: the AMD chip's 8 cores and 16 threads at lower clocks, but with a 28 W TDP, versus the Intel chip's 18 cores and 18 threads at higher clocks with a 125 W TDP. The Intel part's memory bandwidth advantage of 115.2 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s also favors it in bandwidth-bound workloads.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split based on deployment context. For desktop and high-throughput computing, the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is the stronger choice. Its 18 cores, 5.30 GHz boost clock, 30 MB L3 cache, and 115.2 GB/s memory bandwidth deliver top-tier multi-threaded and single-threaded performance, confirmed by its 93rd percentile ranking and average benchmark score of 66855. The unlocked multiplier allows additional performance tuning, and the PCIe Gen 5 support enables high-speed expansion. The launch MSRP of $199, stated once, positions it as a desktop processor with substantial compute capability.

For embedded and mobile applications where power is the primary constraint, the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U is the appropriate selection. Its 28 W TDP is a fraction of the Intel part's 125 W, enabling passive cooling and compact system designs. The 8-core, 16-thread Zen 4 configuration with a 5.10 GHz boost clock provides respectable performance for embedded workloads, and the Radeon 780M integrated graphics handle visual tasks without a discrete GPU. The support for ECC memory and the smaller 178 mm² die size further suit reliability-focused embedded deployments.

The Intel part's release date of 2026-03-10 is later than the AMD part's 2024-04-01, indicating a newer product generation. The Intel chip's 3 nm process node versus AMD's 4 nm process node reflects a more advanced manufacturing process, although the AMD chip uses fewer transistors (25,000 million versus 17,800 million) on a smaller die, indicating a more efficient design for its intended power class.

Neither processor is universally superior. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus wins every recorded benchmark and offers higher raw performance, but it demands desktop-grade power and cooling. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U wins on power efficiency and embedded platform suitability, but the database records no benchmark scores for it, so its quantitative performance remains unverified. Users prioritizing maximum throughput should select the Intel part; users prioritizing low power and compact embedded integration should select the AMD part.