AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X vs Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus and the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X represent opposite ends of the processor spectrum, one a 24-core mobile flagship, the other a 6-core desktop embedded part. The database contains a full benchmark suite for the Intel chip, while the AMD part has no recorded benchmark scores, making direct numeric comparisons impossible. However, the recorded data for the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus provides a clear picture of its performance tier, and the architectural specifications of the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X allow for a qualitative assessment of expected differences.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus posts a multi-threaded Cinebench R23 score of 39,684 points. This places it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs in the database, a strong indicator of high-end performance. Its nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Core i9-14900KF with an average score of 79,371, a delta of 0.3%, and the AMD EPYC 7413 with 80,041 points, a delta of -0.6%. The Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus also edges out the Intel Core i9-14900K by 0.6% and trails the Intel Xeon w5-2565X by 1.4%. These small deltas place the 290HX Plus firmly in the company of flagship desktop and server processors despite its mobile BGA 2114 socket.

In single-core performance, the Intel part achieves 2,356 points in Cinebench R23 single-core and 4,951 in Passmark single-thread tests. Its Cinebench R20 single-core score of 2,992 and R15 single-core score of 340 further confirm a robust single-thread capability. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X, with a boost clock of 5.40 GHz against the Intel's 5.50 GHz, may compete closely on a per-core basis, but without recorded benchmarks for the AMD part, the data cannot confirm this.

The multi-threaded workload results for the Intel chip are particularly dominant due to its 24 cores and 24 threads. The Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 21,198 and R15 multi-core score of 5,981 demonstrate scaling across its core count. The Passmark multi-thread score of 59,439 reinforces this trend. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X, by contrast, offers only 6 cores and 12 threads, a 4x core deficit. Even with the higher base clock of 3.90 GHz versus 2.70 GHz, the AMD part would face an insurmountable disadvantage in heavily threaded workloads based on core count alone.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus wins decisively in every category where parallel throughput matters. Its Passmark integer math score of 164,839, floating point math score of 201,773, and extended instructions score of 51,290 all reflect the advantage of having 24 physical cores. The data compression score of 658,724 and random string sorting score of 80,327 further demonstrate strength in data-intensive operations. Find prime numbers at 519 and physics at 3,387 round out the Passmark suite. The data encryption score of 50,008 also highlights the Intel part's capability in security-related workloads.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X would be expected to win in power-constrained scenarios, as it carries a 65 W TDP versus the Intel's 55 W TDP, though the Intel figure is surprisingly lower given its core count. However, the AMD part operates on the AMD Socket AM5 platform with a 4 nm process node from TSMC, whereas the Intel part uses a 3 nm node, also from TSMC. The smaller process node for Intel suggests potentially better transistor density and efficiency, though the AMD part uses fewer transistors overall at 8,315 million versus Intel's 17,800 million.

For single-threaded responsiveness, the AMD part's 5.40 GHz boost clock nearly matches Intel's 5.50 GHz. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X may deliver comparable per-core performance in lightly threaded applications, but the database shows no recorded benchmarks for it. The Intel part's single-thread Passmark score of 4,951 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,356 establish a high baseline, and the AMD part's specifications suggest it could be competitive in this area without exceeding it.

The AMD part also offers a larger PCIe allocation with Gen 5, 24 lanes (CPU only) versus Intel's Gen 5, 20 lanes. This could benefit systems requiring more expansion slots or additional NVMe devices. The AMD part also has a smaller die size at 70.6 mm² versus Intel's 243 mm², indicating a more compact implementation. Both parts support DDR5 memory and ECC memory, with the Intel part offering higher memory bandwidth at 102.4 GB/s versus AMD's 89.6 GB/s.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X is built on the Granite Ridge architecture, part of the Zen 5 family, and belongs to the Ryzen Embedded generation. It uses a 4 nm process node from TSMC and contains 8,315 million transistors on a die of 70.6 mm². The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus uses the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh architecture, part of the Core Ultra Series 2 and the Ultra 9 generation. It uses a 3 nm process node from TSMC and contains 17,800 million transistors on a die of 243 mm².

The cache hierarchies differ substantially. The AMD part provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part offers 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part's larger per-core L1 and L2 caches, combined with its higher core count, give it a significant aggregate cache advantage. The AMD part's shared L3 of 32 MB is close to Intel's 36 MB, but Intel's larger L2 allocation per core may benefit workloads with high per-thread data locality.

The memory controllers also differ, with both supporting dual-channel DDR5. The Intel part achieves a higher theoretical memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s compared to the AMD part's 89.6 GB/s. Both support ECC memory, which is relevant for embedded and workstation reliability.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The AMD part includes Radeon Graphics, while the Intel part includes Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. The Intel iGPU is a more substantial implementation, likely providing better display and compute capabilities for mobile systems. The AMD Radeon Graphics in the embedded part serves basic display needs.

The sockets differ fundamentally: the AMD part uses AMD Socket AM5, a desktop socket, while the Intel part uses Intel BGA 2114, a ball-grid array for mobile. This reflects their intended market segments, with the AMD part classified as Desktop and the Intel part as Mobile.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every key specification. Core and thread counts: AMD has 6 cores and 12 threads; Intel has 24 cores and 24 threads. Base clocks: AMD runs at 3.90 GHz; Intel at 2.70 GHz. Boost clocks: AMD reaches 5.40 GHz; Intel reaches 5.50 GHz. TDP: AMD is rated at 65 W; Intel at 55 W. Process nodes: AMD uses 4 nm; Intel uses 3 nm, both from TSMC. Transistor counts: AMD has 8,315 million; Intel has 17,800 million. Die sizes: AMD measures 70.6 mm²; Intel measures 243 mm².

Cache specifications diverge: AMD L1 is 80 KB per core, Intel is 192 KB per core; AMD L2 is 1 MB per core, Intel is 3 MB per core; AMD L3 is 32 MB shared, Intel is 36 MB shared. Memory bandwidth: AMD supports 89.6 GB/s; Intel supports 102.4 GB/s. PCIe lanes: AMD provides Gen 5, 24 lanes (CPU only); Intel provides Gen 5, 20 lanes. Integrated graphics: AMD uses Radeon Graphics; Intel uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. Sockets: AMD uses AMD Socket AM5; Intel uses Intel BGA 2114. Market segments: AMD targets Desktop; Intel targets Mobile. Codename and generation: AMD is Granite Ridge, Ryzen Embedded (Zen 5); Intel is Arrow Lake-HX Refresh, Ultra 9. Release dates: AMD launched on 2025-10-06; Intel on 2026-03-16. Both are active production parts, both support DDR5 and ECC memory, and both have unlocked multipliers.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X has a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, and the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has a boost clock of 5.50 GHz.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus compare to its nearest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The Intel part has an average benchmark score of 79,574. It is 0.3% higher than the Intel Core i9-14900KF, 0.6% higher than the Intel Core i9-14900K, 0.6% lower than the AMD EPYC 7413, and 1.4% lower than the Intel Xeon w5-2565X.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X and the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus support ECC memory, and both support DDR5.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X supports 89.6 GB/s, and the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus supports 102.4 GB/s, both over dual-channel DDR5.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 36 MB of shared L3 cache, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9600X has 32 MB of shared L3 cache.