AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core and thread counts of the two processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X reaches a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus tops out at 5.30 GHz.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes. Both the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus support ECC memory.

Q: What is the manufacturing process for each chip?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X is built on a 4 nm process, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is built on a 3 nm process. Both use TSMC as the foundry.

Q: How does the Intel processor compare to its closest rival in the database?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has an average benchmark score of 66855, placing it 0.1% behind the AMD EPYC 4465P (66925) and 0.9% behind the Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX (67469). It is 1.1% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus (66159).

Q: Which processor has a higher memory bandwidth rating?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, compared to 89.6 GB/s for the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X belongs to the 9000 series and uses the Granite Ridge codename, built on the Zen 5 architecture. It is manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC with 8,315 million transistors on a 70.6 mm² die. The chip has 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. Its cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3. The processor supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus and features PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes, CPU only. It includes Radeon Graphics as integrated graphics. The TDP is rated at 65 watts. This is a desktop market segment part with an active production status, released on 2025-10-06. The multiplier is unlocked, and the socket is AMD Socket AM5.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is part of the Core Ultra Series 2 and uses the Arrow Lake Refresh codename with the Arrow Lake generation. It is manufactured on a 3 nm process at TSMC with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. This processor has 18 cores and 18 threads, indicating that the extra cores do not bring additional threads; the thread count equals the core count. The base clock is 4.20 GHz with a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. Cache amounts are higher per core: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3. Memory support is DDR5 with a dual-channel bus, and the memory bandwidth is 115.2 GB/s. PCIe support is Gen 5 with 20 lanes, CPU only. The integrated graphics are Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The TDP is 125 watts. This part is also in the desktop market segment, active in production, and was released on 2026-03-10. It has an unlocked multiplier and uses Intel Socket 1851.

The most notable architectural differences are the core counts, process nodes, and cache layouts. The Intel part has triple the core count of the AMD part (18 versus 6), and it does so without simultaneous multithreading, meaning each core handles one thread. The AMD part uses simultaneous multithreading to reach 12 threads from 6 cores. The Intel chip is built on a smaller 3 nm node versus 4 nm for AMD, and it packs more than double the transistors (17,800 million versus 8,315 million) on a much larger die (243 mm² versus 70.6 mm²). The L2 cache per core is three times larger on the Intel chip (3 MB versus 1 MB), while the L3 cache is slightly smaller (30 MB versus 32 MB). The Intel part also carries a higher TDP of 125 watts versus 65 watts.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for these two processors, so the comparison relies on the benchmark suite recorded for the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus and the absence of comparable data for the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X. The AMD chip has no benchmark scores listed in the database, while the Intel chip has 17 recorded measurements across Cinebench and Passmark tests.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus produces strong multicore results. In Cinebench R15 multicore, it scores 4640. In Cinebench R20 multicore, the score is 18442. In Cinebench R23 multicore, it reaches 30867. These results reflect the 18-core configuration. The single-core results are 328 in Cinebench R15, 2603 in Cinebench R20, and 2261 in Cinebench R23.

Passmark results for the Intel part cover a wide range of workloads. The multithread score is 51596, and the single-thread score is 4757 (also recorded as 4757 under the singlethread test name). Data compression scores 568721, while data encryption scores 42144. Extended instructions score 44565, find prime numbers scores 486, floating point math scores 162692, integer math scores 125091, physics scores 3494, and random string sorting scores 69090.

The average benchmark score for the Intel processor is 66855, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs in the database. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X has an average benchmark score of 0 and sits in the 50th percentile, with no recorded benchmarks. This means the database currently has no measurement data to support a direct head-to-head comparison. The Intel part outscores the AMD part across every category where data exists, but that is entirely because the AMD part has no recorded scores.

The nearest rivals for the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus provide context for its standing. The AMD EPYC 4465P scores 66925, which is 0.1% higher. The Intel Xeon 6515P scores 67006, 0.2% higher. The Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX scores 67469, 0.9% higher. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 66159, which is 1.1% lower. These narrow deltas indicate that the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus sits in a tightly packed performance band among its closest competitors.

The Verdict

The data shows a clear asymmetry: the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has extensive benchmark coverage, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X has none. Any direct performance conclusion between the two cannot be drawn from measured results. What can be stated is that the Intel part demonstrates strong multicore throughput in the database, with an average score of 66855 and a 93rd percentile ranking. The AMD part has no recorded average score and sits at the 50th percentile by default.

For users comparing these two based on the recorded data alone, the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is the only one with measurable performance. Its 18 cores and 18 threads deliver high Cinebench multicore numbers, and its Passmark scores cover integer math, floating point, encryption, and compression workloads. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X offers a lower TDP of 65 watts, a smaller die, and a higher boost clock of 5.40 GHz, but no benchmark evidence is available to confirm how those specifications translate into real-world performance.

The Intel part also carries a launch MSRP of $199, while the AMD part has no listed launch MSRP. The Intel processor is the only one of the two that can be assessed against its nearest rivals, and it sits within 0.9% of the Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX and within 0.2% of the Intel Xeon 6515P. The AMD part cannot be positioned relative to any rival because no nearest rivals are recorded for it.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification field.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads.

Base clocks differ: 3.90 GHz for AMD versus 4.20 GHz for Intel. Boost clocks are close, with AMD at 5.40 GHz and Intel at 5.30 GHz.

TDP ratings differ substantially: 65 watts for AMD versus 125 watts for Intel.

Sockets are different: AMD Socket AM5 for the AMD part, Intel Socket 1851 for the Intel part.

The process node differs: 4 nm for AMD versus 3 nm for Intel. The foundry is the same, TSMC.

Transistor counts differ: 8,315 million for AMD versus 17,800 million for Intel. Die sizes are 70.6 mm² for AMD versus 243 mm² for Intel.

Cache configurations differ. AMD has 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 32 MB shared L3. Intel has 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 30 MB shared L3.

Memory bandwidth differs: 89.6 GB/s for AMD versus 115.2 GB/s for Intel. Both support DDR5 and use a dual-channel bus. Both support ECC memory.

PCIe lanes differ: AMD has Gen 5 with 24 lanes, Intel has Gen 5 with 20 lanes, both CPU only.

Integrated graphics differ: AMD uses Radeon Graphics, Intel uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU.

Release dates differ: AMD released on 2025-10-06, Intel released on 2026-03-10.

The launch MSRP for the Intel part is $199. The AMD part has no launch MSRP listed.

The generation and codename fields also differ: AMD is Ryzen Embedded (Zen 5, Granite Ridge), while Intel is Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake, Arrow Lake Refresh).

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus wins in every benchmark category where data exists, because the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X has no recorded benchmark scores. The Intel part delivers high multicore scores in Cinebench R15 (4640), R20 (18442), and R23 (30867). Its Passmark multithread score of 51596 and single-thread score of 4757 provide a broad performance profile. The 18-core configuration gives it a clear advantage in heavily threaded workloads such as data compression (568721), integer math (125091), and floating point math (162692).

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X has advantages in specification-level characteristics rather than measured performance. Its TDP of 65 watts is nearly half the Intel part's 125 watts, which suggests lower power draw in operation. Its die size of 70.6 mm² is far smaller than Intel's 243 mm², and its transistor count of 8,315 million is less than half of Intel's 17,800 million. The AMD part also has a higher boost clock at 5.40 GHz versus 5.30 GHz. Its PCIe Gen 5 implementation offers 24 lanes versus 20 lanes for Intel. The AMD part has a larger shared L3 cache at 32 MB versus 30 MB.

For use cases involving measured performance, the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is the only option with database support. For scenarios where power efficiency, smaller physical footprint, or higher boost clocks matter, the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X has specification-level advantages that are not yet backed by benchmark results. The Intel part sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the AMD part sits at the 50th percentile with no recorded measurements.