AMD Ryzen Embedded 9700X vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus Comparison

FAQ

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

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9700X has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads. The Intel part uses a hybrid architecture where performance cores do not support hyper-threading, resulting in equal core and thread counts.

Q: How do the two processors compare in terms of single-core performance?

A: Based on recorded benchmark data, the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus delivers a single-thread score of 4757 in PassMark and a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2261. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9700X has no benchmark scores recorded in the database, so direct numerical comparison is not possible from the available data.

Q: What is the process node and die size for each chip?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9700X is built on TSMC's 4 nm process with a die size of 70.6 mm² and 8,315 million transistors. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus uses TSMC's 3 nm node, has a die size of 243 mm², and contains 17,800 million transistors.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9700X and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus support ECC memory. Both also use dual-channel DDR5 memory, though the Intel part has a higher recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s compared to 89.6 GB/s for AMD.

Q: What socket types do these CPUs require?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9700X uses AMD Socket AM5, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus uses Intel Socket 1851. These sockets are not cross-compatible.

Q: Which processor has a higher launch MSRP?

A: The database lists a launch MSRP of $199 for the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus. No launch MSRP is recorded for the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9700X.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9700X belongs to the 9000 series and carries the codename Granite Ridge, built on the Zen 5 architecture at a 4 nm process node from TSMC. It uses 8 cores with simultaneous multithreading, giving 16 threads total. The base clock is 3.80 GHz with a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. The thermal design power is 65 watts. The chip supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus with a recorded bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. PCIe connectivity is Gen 5 with 24 lanes from the CPU. Integrated graphics are provided by Radeon Graphics. The multiplier is unlocked, and the production status is active. The release date recorded is October 6, 2025.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus comes from the Core Ultra Series 2 with the codename Arrow Lake Refresh, using the Ultra 5 generation of the Arrow Lake family. It is fabricated on TSMC's 3 nm node with a die size of 243 mm² and 17,800 million transistors. The CPU has 18 cores and 18 threads, meaning no hyper-threading is enabled. Base clock is 4.20 GHz with a boost of 5.30 GHz. The TDP is 125 watts. Memory support is DDR5 over dual-channel with a higher bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. PCIe lanes are Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The integrated graphics are Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. The multiplier is unlocked. The release date is March 10, 2026, and the launch MSRP is $199.

The cache structures differ significantly. AMD allocates 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3. Intel allocates 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3. The Intel per-core L2 allocation is three times larger than AMD's, which can benefit workloads that repeatedly access a small working set. The AMD L3 pool is slightly larger overall by 2 MB, but the Intel part has more total cache per core when combining L2 and L3. The process node difference, 3 nm versus 4 nm, suggests Intel's design uses denser transistors, which aligns with the higher transistor count on a much larger die.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a full set of benchmark scores for the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus, but no recorded benchmarks for the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9700X. This makes a direct head-to-head numerical comparison impossible from the available data. However, the Intel part's scores can be analyzed on their own terms to understand its performance profile.

In Cinebench R15, the Intel CPU scores 4640 in multicore and 328 in single-core. In Cinebench R20, it scores 18442 multicore and 2603 single-core. The R23 results are 30867 multicore and 2261 single-core. The single-core scaling from R15 to R20 is substantial, and the multicore scores track expected scaling with 18 threads.

PassMark results show a varied workload profile. The multithread score is 51596, while single-thread is 4757. Integer math scores 125091, and floating point math scores 162692, indicating that the floating-point units are delivering higher throughput than integer units. Data compression scores 568721, which is a strong result for a desktop chip. Data encryption scores 42144, and extended instructions score 44565. Prime number finding scores 486, which is relatively low compared to other integer tasks, suggesting a weakness in that specific workload pattern. Random string sorting scores 69090, and physics scores 3494.

The average benchmark score for the Intel part is 66855, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 4465P with an average score of 66925, which is 0.1% higher, and the Intel Xeon 6515P with 67006, which is 0.2% higher. The Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX scores 67469, which is 0.9% higher. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 66159, which is 1.1% lower than the 250K Plus. These small deltas indicate the 250K Plus sits in a tightly contested performance band where a few points separate competing parts.

The lack of AMD benchmark data means the analysis cannot produce a win count for either side. The recorded winsA and winsB fields are both zero. The headToHeadBenchmarks array is empty. Any claim about which chip wins a specific test would require the AMD scores, which are absent from the database.

The Verdict

Based solely on the recorded data, the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has a complete benchmark profile and a percentile ranking of 93, with an average benchmark score of 66855. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9700X has no benchmark scores, no percentile ranking beyond the baseline 50, and an average benchmark score of zero. The database cannot confirm any performance advantage for the AMD part in any measured workload.

The Intel CPU's nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 4465P, scores 66925, which is only 0.1% higher. This places the 250K Plus within a fraction of a percent of a server-class EPYC part. The Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX, a higher-tier mobile part, is 0.9% ahead. The 250KF Plus, which is the same chip without integrated graphics, is 1.1% behind. These margins are small enough that workload-specific behavior could flip the ranking depending on the application.

For users seeking a desktop processor with verified multi-threaded and single-threaded performance, the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is the only option in this comparison with measured data. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9700X offers a lower TDP of 65 watts versus 125 watts, which could be relevant for thermally constrained systems, but no performance numbers exist to evaluate the trade-off. The data shows that the Intel part delivers strong scores across Cinebench and PassMark workloads, with a 93rd percentile placement that indicates it outperforms the vast majority of CPUs in the database.

The AMD part's lack of recorded benchmarks means a verdict on its performance cannot be rendered. The database shows a production status of Active and a release date of October 6, 2025, but no measurable results. Any decision between these two processors based on performance must defer to the Intel part, as it is the only one with empirical data supporting its capabilities.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in every major specification field except for memory type, memory bus, and ECC support.

• Cores: 8 (AMD) versus 18 (Intel)
• Threads: 16 (AMD) versus 18 (Intel)
• Base clock: 3.80 GHz (AMD) versus 4.20 GHz (Intel)
• Boost clock: 5.50 GHz (AMD) versus 5.30 GHz (Intel)
• TDP: 65 W (AMD) versus 125 W (Intel)
• Socket: AMD Socket AM5 versus Intel Socket 1851
• Codename: Granite Ridge versus Arrow Lake Refresh
• Process node: 4 nm (AMD) versus 3 nm (Intel)
• Transistors: 8,315 million (AMD) versus 17,800 million (Intel)
• Die size: 70.6 mm² (AMD) versus 243 mm² (Intel)
• L1 cache per core: 80 KB (AMD) versus 192 KB (Intel)
• L2 cache per core: 1 MB (AMD) versus 3 MB (Intel)
• L3 cache shared: 32 MB (AMD) versus 30 MB (Intel)
• Memory bandwidth: 89.6 GB/s (AMD) versus 115.2 GB/s (Intel)
• PCIe lanes: 24 (AMD) versus 20 (Intel)
• Integrated graphics: Radeon Graphics (AMD) versus Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU (Intel)
• Release date: 2025-10-06 (AMD) versus 2026-03-10 (Intel)
• Launch MSRP: none recorded (AMD) versus $199 (Intel)
• Part number: 100-000001404E (AMD) versus SA4UZ (Intel)

The AMD chip has a higher boost clock by 200 MHz, while the Intel chip has a higher base clock by 400 MHz. The Intel part has more than double the cores and more than double the transistor count. The die size difference is substantial, with Intel's die over three times larger. The AMD chip has four more PCIe lanes, which could matter for storage or expansion configurations. Both support ECC and have unlocked multipliers.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus wins in all categories where measured data exists. Its 18 cores and 18 threads deliver a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 30867, which is a strong result for a desktop processor. The single-thread score of 4757 in PassMark confirms that the architecture is competitive in lightly threaded applications. The floating point math score of 162692 and integer math score of 125091 indicate balanced arithmetic performance. Data compression at 568721 shows strong throughput for archival and compression workloads. The 93rd percentile ranking places it ahead of most CPUs in the database.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9700X wins in the specification comparison on several fronts without requiring benchmark data. Its TDP of 65 watts is nearly half the Intel part's 125 watts, making it more suitable for power-constrained or small-form-factor systems. The boost clock of 5.50 GHz is higher than Intel's 5.30 GHz, which could translate to a single-thread advantage if the architecture scales accordingly. The AMD chip has 24 PCIe lanes versus 20, offering more direct CPU-attached expansion. The smaller die size of 70.6 mm² suggests lower manufacturing cost per wafer, though the database does not record a launch MSRP for AMD to confirm a price advantage.

The Intel part has the only recorded launch MSRP at $199. The AMD part has no price data. For workloads that benefit from high core counts, such as rendering, video encoding, or scientific computing, the Intel part's 18 cores provide a structural advantage that the AMD part's 8 cores cannot match without superior IPC gains. The database does not provide IPC measurements, so any such comparison remains speculative.

The AMD chip's higher boost clock and lower TDP make it a candidate for single-thread-sensitive applications and power-limited environments, but without benchmark scores, the database cannot confirm that it actually delivers better single-thread performance. The Intel chip's measured data covers a wide range of workloads, and its nearest rivals are all within 1.1% of its average score, indicating it competes at the top of its class. The AMD EPYC 4465P being only 0.1% faster than the Intel part suggests that the 250K Plus is performing near the ceiling for its segment.