AMD Ryzen Embedded 9700X vs Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus Comparison

AMD Ryzen Embedded 9700X vs Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus

The database contains detailed benchmark results only for the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9700X has no recorded scores. Consequently, the quantitative comparison here is one-sided. The data shows the Intel part scores 39,684 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 2,356 in single-core, and an average benchmark score of 79,574, placing it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs. The AMD processor, by contrast, has a percentile ranking of 50 and an average score of zero, indicating the recorded data does not yet capture its performance. This analysis will interpret the Intel results against its nearest rivals and the AMD part’s specifications.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Because the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9700X lacks any benchmark entries, there are no direct head-to-head measurements to compare. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus, however, provides a full suite of scores that show its strengths. In Cinebench R23, the Intel chip scores 39,684 in multi-core and 2,356 in single-core. The R20 results are 21,198 and 2,992 respectively, while R15 shows 5,981 multi-core and 340 single-core. These scores consistently indicate a processor that excels in threaded workloads, which aligns with its 24-core, 24-thread configuration.

The PassMark suite reinforces this pattern. The Intel part records 59,439 in multithread, 164,839 in integer math, and 201,773 in floating point math. Data compression reaches 658,724, while encryption hits 50,008 and extended instructions score 51,290. Random string sorting produces 80,327, and find prime numbers manages 519. Single-thread PassMark performance is 4,951, and physics scores 3,387.

Against its nearest rivals, the Intel part stands out. The database lists the Intel Core i9-14900KF with an average score of 79,371, which is 0.3% lower than the 290HX Plus. The i9-14900K scores 79,097, a 0.6% deficit. The AMD EPYC 7413 scores 80,041, which is 0.6% higher, and the Intel Xeon w5-2565X scores 80,671, 1.4% higher. In practical terms, the 290HX Plus trades blows with these desktop and server parts, sitting within a narrow band of roughly 1% either way. The data indicates that the Intel mobile processor delivers performance comparable to high-end desktop chips, a notable result for a 55W part.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9700X, with 8 cores and 16 threads, would logically produce lower multi-core scores than the 24-core Intel part, but the database offers no numbers to confirm this. The head-to-head section must therefore rely on the Intel data alone, as the recorded measurements provide no basis for a direct comparison.

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score for the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus?

A: The recorded average benchmark score is 79,574, which places the processor in the 95th percentile of all CPUs in the database.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus compare to the Intel Core i9-14900K?

A: The 290HX Plus has an average score of 79,574, which is 0.6% higher than the i9-14900K’s average of 79,097. This difference is minor and within typical run-to-run variance.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9700X have any benchmark scores in the database?

A: No, the AMD processor has an empty benchmark array and an average score of zero. Its percentile ranking is 50, but no performance measurements are available for analysis.

Q: What are the Cinebench R23 scores for the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus?

A: The multi-core score is 39,684 and the single-core score is 2,356. These figures reflect the processor’s 24 cores and 24 threads in heavily threaded workloads.

Q: Which rival is closest in average score to the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900KF has an average score of 79,371, which is 0.3% lower than the 290HX Plus. That is the smallest delta among the listed nearest rivals.

Q: What is the single-thread PassMark score for the Intel part?

A: The PassMark single-thread score is 4,951, with an identical value recorded under the singlethread test name.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus wins in every measured benchmark category because it is the only part with recorded scores. Its multi-core results are particularly dominant, with Cinebench R23 multi-core at 39,684 and PassMark multithread at 59,439. These figures indicate a processor that is well-suited for rendering, compilation, and other parallel tasks. The 24-core configuration, combined with 36 MB of shared L3 cache, supports this strength.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9700X, despite lacking benchmarks, wins on paper in certain specification categories. It uses a socketed AM5 platform, which allows for easier replacement or upgrade compared to Intel’s soldered BGA 2114. The AMD part also has a 3.80 GHz base clock versus Intel’s 2.70 GHz, suggesting better performance in lightly threaded tasks where boost clocks are not sustained. However, without benchmark data, these advantages remain speculative rather than measured.

For users who rely on the database’s recorded performance, the Intel part is the clear choice in every workload that has been tested. The AMD processor’s wins would have to be inferred from its higher base clock and socket design, but the data does not confirm any actual performance advantage.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9700X has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads. Base clocks are 3.80 GHz for AMD and 2.70 GHz for Intel, though both share a 5.50 GHz boost clock. The 65W TDP of the AMD part is higher than Intel’s 55W, despite the Intel chip having three times the core count.

Cache configurations diverge significantly. The AMD processor has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3. The Intel processor has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. In total cache terms, the Intel part carries more L3 (36 MB vs 32 MB) and substantially more per-core L2.

Memory bandwidth favors Intel at 102.4 GB/s versus AMD’s 89.6 GB/s, though both support DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration. Both processors support ECC memory. PCIe lanes differ, with AMD offering Gen 5 with 24 lanes (CPU only) and Intel offering Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The AMD part has a larger socket (AM5) while Intel uses BGA 2114.

The integrated graphics also differ: AMD includes Radeon Graphics, while Intel includes Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. Market segments are desktop for AMD and mobile for Intel. Both processors have unlocked multipliers and active production status. Release dates are October 6, 2025 for AMD and March 16, 2026 for Intel.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9700X is built on the Zen 5 architecture with the Granite Ridge codename, using a 4 nm process at TSMC. It contains 8,315 million transistors on a 70.6 mm² die. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus uses the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh architecture with the Arrow Lake-HX codename, fabricated on a 3 nm TSMC process. It packs 17,800 million transistors into a 243 mm² die.

The generation fields confirm the architectural split: AMD’s generation is "Ryzen Embedded (Zen 5 (Granite Ridge))" while Intel’s is "Ultra 9 (Arrow Lake-HX)". The 3 nm node for Intel is smaller than AMD’s 4 nm, and the transistor count is more than double. This explains the Intel die size of 243 mm², which is over three times larger than AMD’s 70.6 mm².

L1 and L2 cache layouts reflect the core counts. AMD’s per-core L1 is 80 KB and L2 is 1 MB, while Intel’s per-core L1 is 192 KB and L2 is 3 MB. The larger per-core caches on the Intel side align with its higher core count and thread count. Shared L3 is 32 MB on AMD and 36 MB on Intel.

The socket and market segment differences are architectural too. AMD uses a desktop socket (AM5) designed for user-upgradeable systems, while Intel uses a mobile BGA 2114 socket that is soldered to the board. The production status is active for both, but the release dates place the AMD part about five months earlier.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus as a high-performance processor, sitting in the 95th percentile with an average score of 79,574. Its nearest rivals, the i9-14900KF and i9-14900K, are only 0.3% and 0.6% behind, respectively. The AMD EPYC 7413 and Xeon w5-2565X are 0.6% and 1.4% ahead, placing the Intel part in a competitive band with desktop and server silicon. This is a strong result for a mobile processor with a 55W TDP.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9700X cannot be evaluated on performance because the database contains no benchmark scores for it. Its specifications suggest a different role: a desktop part with 8 cores and 16 threads, a 65W TDP, and a 5.50 GHz boost clock. The higher base clock of 3.80 GHz may give it an edge in single-threaded responsiveness, but no measurements confirm this.

For users choosing between these two, the Intel part is the only one with verified performance data, and that data shows exceptional multi-core throughput. The AMD part would be a choice based on its socketed AM5 platform, ECC support, and lower core count, which may suit embedded or controlled-power environments. The data, however, supports the Intel processor for any workload where measured performance matters. The AMD part remains an unknown quantity until benchmark results are recorded.