AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U vs Intel Core Ultra 9 386H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a one-sided comparison, as the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U has no benchmark scores listed in the database, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has a full suite of recorded results. The Intel processor holds an 88th percentile rank against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 43,210. The AMD part sits at the 50th percentile with an average score of 0, which reflects the absence of measured results rather than a performance floor.

Looking at the Intel processor's recorded scores, the Cinebench R23 multi-core result of 20,547 points indicates strong parallel throughput for a mobile part. Its single-core score of 2,071.5 in the same test shows the per-thread capability is respectable but not dominant. The Cinebench R20 results continue the pattern: 12,820 multi-core and 1,809 single-core. In the older R15 test, the Intel chip records 3,223 multi-core and 303.5 single-core.

PassMark results for the Intel part show varied strengths. The multi-thread score of 35,399 and the integer math score of 87,284 suggest solid general compute. Floating point math reaches 108,527. Data compression scores 352,365, which is a high figure indicating strong throughput for that workload. Data encryption records 27,150, extended instructions 29,138, and random string sorting 42,135. The physics score of 3,028 and the find prime numbers score of 341 are lower, which indicates these specific workloads do not favor the chip's architecture. Single-thread performance in PassMark is 4,218.

Because the AMD processor has no entries in the benchmark database, the comparison cannot show wins in either direction. The Intel part's scores stand alone, and the percentile gap (88 versus 50) reflects the missing data for AMD rather than a direct head-to-head result. The nearest rivals to the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H are all close in average score: the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 at 43,326 (0.3% higher), the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465 at 43,431 (0.5% higher), the Intel Core i9-12900 at 42,906 (0.7% lower), and the Intel Core i9-12900KF at 42,830 (0.9% lower). This places the Core Ultra 9 386H within a tight performance cluster, essentially matching those desktop and mobile parts in average benchmark terms.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U uses Zen 4 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, with the Hawk Point codename. It is part of the 8000 series and the Ryzen Embedded generation. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H uses Panther Lake architecture on a 3 nm Intel process, with the Panther Lake codename, and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3 and the Ultra 9 generation.

Core counts differ substantially. The AMD chip has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel chip has 16 cores and 16 threads. This means the Intel part has twice the physical cores but no hyperthreading, so thread counts match. The AMD part relies on simultaneous multithreading to reach 16 threads from 8 cores.

Clock speeds also differ. The AMD processor has a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The Intel processor has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The AMD chip runs higher at both ends, but the Intel chip has more cores to distribute work across.

Cache layouts are distinct. The AMD part has 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3. The Intel part has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB shared L3. The Intel chip has larger per-core caches at each level and a larger L3 pool.

Memory support differs. The AMD chip supports DDR5 with dual-channel access and a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory. The Intel chip supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, with a higher memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. It does not support ECC memory.

PCIe capabilities vary. The AMD processor provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The Intel processor provides Gen 5 with 12 lanes (CPU only). The Intel part has a newer PCIe generation but fewer lanes.

Integrated graphics differ. The AMD chip uses Radeon 780M graphics. The Intel chip uses Intel Xe3 Graphics.

The AMD processor has 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The Intel processor has no transistor count or die size recorded in the database.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the recorded data, the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H wins every measurable category simply because it has results. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U has no benchmark entries, so no workload can be attributed to it from the database. The Intel chip's scores indicate particular strengths in data compression (352,365), floating point math (108,527), and integer math (87,284). These are compute-heavy tasks that benefit from the 16 physical cores.

The Intel chip's multi-core Cinebench scores (20,547 in R23, 12,820 in R20, 3,223 in R15) confirm that heavily threaded workloads such as rendering and video encoding are well served. The single-core scores (2,071.5 in R23, 1,809 in R20, 303.5 in R15) are adequate for everyday tasks but not exceptional, which is typical for a mobile processor with many cores.

The AMD chip's higher boost clock of 5.10 GHz and its 16 threads from 8 cores could theoretically favor lightly threaded workloads, but the database contains no measurements to confirm this. The AMD part's lower memory bandwidth (89.6 GB/s versus 115.2 GB/s) suggests it would trail the Intel chip in memory-bound tasks, but again, no scores exist to verify.

The Intel chip's ECC memory support is absent, while the AMD chip supports it. This gives the AMD part an advantage in reliability-sensitive environments, but performance data is still missing. The AMD chip's smaller process node (4 nm versus 3 nm) and lower TDP (28 W versus 25 W) are close, with the Intel part drawing slightly less power.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 3.30 GHz for AMD and 2.10 GHz for Intel. Boost clocks are 5.10 GHz for AMD and 4.90 GHz for Intel.

TDP differs slightly: 28 W for AMD and 25 W for Intel. Sockets are different: AMD Socket FP8 versus Intel BGA 2540. Architecture is Zen 4 for AMD and Panther Lake for Intel. Process nodes are 4 nm (TSMC) for AMD and 3 nm (Intel) for Intel.

Cache hierarchies differ: AMD has 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3. Intel has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB shared L3. Memory support is DDR5 for AMD and DDR5 plus LPDDR5X for Intel. Memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s for AMD and 115.2 GB/s for Intel. ECC memory is supported by AMD but not by Intel.

PCIe is Gen 4 with 20 lanes for AMD and Gen 5 with 12 lanes for Intel. Integrated graphics are Radeon 780M for AMD and Intel Xe3 Graphics for Intel. The AMD part has 25,000 million transistors and a 178 mm² die size; the Intel part has no recorded transistor count or die size.

Release dates differ: April 1, 2024 for AMD and January 4, 2026 for Intel. Both are active in production and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The Intel part has a recorded part number (SA4R5Q9EH), while the AMD part's part number is unknown.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has 16 cores, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U has 8 cores. Both have 16 threads, so the AMD chip relies on simultaneous multithreading to match the thread count.

Q: Does the AMD chip support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H does not support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U has 89.6 GB/s. The Intel part also supports LPDDR5X memory in addition to DDR5.

Q: What is the process node for each chip?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U uses a 4 nm process from TSMC. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H uses a 3 nm process from Intel.

Q: Are there benchmark scores for the AMD processor?

A: The database contains no benchmark scores for the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U. All recorded scores in this comparison belong to the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H.

Q: How does the Intel chip compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has an average benchmark score of 43,210. Its closest rival is the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 at 43,326 (0.3% higher), followed by the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465 at 43,431 (0.5% higher), the Intel Core i9-12900 at 42,906 (0.7% lower), and the Intel Core i9-12900KF at 42,830 (0.9% lower).

The Verdict

The data supports only one choice for measurable performance: the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H. It has a complete set of benchmark results across Cinebench R15, R20, R23, and PassMark workloads, with an 88th percentile rank and an average score of 43,210. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U has no recorded scores, a 50th percentile rank, and an average score of 0. Anyone selecting between these two for performance should rely on the Intel chip's numbers, which show strong multi-core throughput (20,547 in Cinebench R23) and solid single-thread capability (4,218 in PassMark single-thread).

The AMD chip does hold specification advantages in certain areas: a higher boost clock (5.10 GHz versus 4.90 GHz), ECC memory support, and a larger PCIe lane count (20 Gen 4 lanes versus 12 Gen 5 lanes). These features could matter for specific embedded or reliability-focused use cases, but the absence of benchmark data means no performance claim can be made for the AMD part. The Intel chip's higher memory bandwidth (115.2 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s) and larger L3 cache (18 MB versus 16 MB) align with its measured performance strengths.

For a builder who needs verified performance numbers, the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H is the only option with evidence. For a builder who prioritizes ECC memory or a higher boost clock and is willing to accept unmeasured performance, the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8840U offers those features, but the database cannot confirm how it runs. The Intel chip also sits in a tight competitive cluster with its nearest rivals, all within 0.9% of its average score, which indicates it is a well-balanced performer relative to similarly positioned processors.