AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X vs Intel Core 7 240H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X and the Intel Core 7 240H. The AMD processor has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, while the Intel part has a full suite of Cinebench and PassMark results. The Intel Core 7 240H therefore holds all recorded wins by default, but this reflects a gap in available measurements rather than a performance verdict.

The Intel Core 7 240H posts a multi-core Cinebench R23 score of 15,764 points and a single-core score of 1,719 points. In Cinebench R20, it reaches 8,562 multi-core and 1,208 single-core. The older Cinebench R15 test shows 2,360 multi-core and 249 single-core. These scores place the Intel part at the 82nd percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 31,483.

PassMark results for the Intel Core 7 240H show a multithread score of 23,975 and a single-thread score of 3,782. The floating point math test returns 58,905, integer math returns 80,396, and extended instructions reach 16,897. Data compression hits 271,774, data encryption scores 15,155, and random string sorting finishes at 28,866. The find prime numbers test scores 102, and physics reaches 1,723.

Since the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X has zero recorded benchmarks and zero nearest rivals in the database, no direct comparison of measured scores is possible. The database lists its percentile as 50, which is a neutral placeholder rather than a measured ranking. Any statement about relative wins between these two specific processors must rely on architectural and specification differences rather than benchmark output.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core 7 240H has 10 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The AMD part has a base clock of 4.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. The Intel part has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X supports DDR5 only, with dual-channel memory and a recorded bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel Core 7 240H supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also with a dual-channel bus, but the database does not list a bandwidth figure for it.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 7 240H does not.

Q: How many PCIe lanes does each CPU provide?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X provides Gen 5 with 24 lanes from the CPU only. The Intel Core 7 240H provides Gen 5 with 8 lanes from the CPU only.

Q: What is the market segment for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X is classified as a Desktop processor. The Intel Core 7 240H is classified as a Mobile processor.

Q: What integrated graphics does each processor include?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X includes Radeon Graphics. The Intel Core 7 240H includes Iris Xe Graphics 64EU.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X 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. The transistor count is 16,630 million, and the die size is listed as 2x 70.6 mm². Its generation is recorded as Ryzen Embedded (Zen 5 (Granite Ridge)). The processor uses the AMD Socket AM5 and has an unlocked multiplier.

The Intel Core 7 240H uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-H, and belongs to the Raptor Lake Refresh generation. It is manufactured on a 10 nm process at Intel. The database does not list transistor count or die size for this part. It uses the Intel BGA 1744 socket and has a locked multiplier.

Cache configurations differ between the two. The AMD part has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of L3 cache. The Intel part also has 80 KB of L1 per core but doubles the L2 to 2 MB per core, while its L3 is 24 MB shared across the chip. The AMD processor therefore carries substantially more total L3 cache, while the Intel processor has a larger per-core L2 allocation.

Memory support separates the two clearly. The AMD processor is DDR5-only with ECC support, while the Intel processor supports both DDR4 and DDR5 and lacks ECC. The AMD processor has a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the Intel part has no bandwidth figure in the database. PCIe provisioning also differs: the AMD part exposes Gen 5 with 24 CPU-only lanes, and the Intel part exposes Gen 5 with 8 CPU-only lanes.

The process node gap is notable. The AMD part uses 4 nm TSMC silicon, while the Intel part uses 10 nm Intel silicon. The AMD part also has a higher base clock by 1.90 GHz and a higher boost clock by 0.40 GHz. The TDP values differ substantially: the AMD part is rated at 120 watts, while the Intel part is rated at 45 watts.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X was released on October 6, 2025. The Intel Core 7 240H was released on December 17, 2024. The Intel part has a recorded launch MSRP of $502. The AMD part has no launch MSRP listed in the database. The AMD part number is 100-000000662E, and the Intel part number is SRQ6TQ5ML.

The Verdict

The database shows that the Intel Core 7 240H is the only one of the two with recorded benchmark data. Its average benchmark score of 31,483 places it at the 82nd percentile of all CPUs, with near-even deltas against its nearest rivals: Intel Core Ultra 3 205 at 31,473, AMD Ryzen 9 5980HX at 31,495, Intel Core Ultra 5 225H at 31,508, and Intel Core i5-13500 at 31,510. These rivals sit within 0.1 percent of the Intel Core 7 240H, indicating that it performs in a tight competitive band.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X has no measured scores, no nearest rivals, and a placeholder percentile of 50. Its architectural specifications suggest capability, particularly the 12-core, 24-thread configuration, the 5.60 GHz boost clock, the 64 MB L3 cache, and the 24 PCIe Gen 5 lanes. However, the database cannot confirm how these specifications translate into benchmark performance because no results exist.

For the Intel Core 7 240H, the data supports a clear position: it is a competitive mobile processor that trades within 0.1 percent of several recent Core Ultra and Ryzen parts. The AMD processor is an embedded desktop part with a higher core count, higher clocks, more cache, more PCIe lanes, and ECC support. The recorded data does not allow a performance ranking between the two, so any choice must rest on the specification differences and the Intel part's measured standing among its rivals.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every recorded specification field.

Cores and threads: AMD has 12 cores and 24 threads, Intel has 10 cores and 16 threads.

Clocks: AMD base is 4.40 GHz, Intel base is 2.50 GHz. AMD boost is 5.60 GHz, Intel boost is 5.20 GHz.

TDP: AMD is 120 W, Intel is 45 W.

Socket: AMD uses AMD Socket AM5, Intel uses Intel BGA 1744.

Codename: AMD is Granite Ridge, Intel is Raptor Lake-H.

Architecture: AMD is listed with null architecture but Zen 5 generation, Intel is listed with Raptor Lake architecture and Raptor Lake Refresh generation.

Process node: AMD is 4 nm at TSMC, Intel is 10 nm at Intel.

Transistors: AMD has 16,630 million, Intel has no listed value.

Die size: AMD is 2x 70.6 mm², Intel has no listed value.

L1 cache: both have 80 KB per core.

L2 cache: AMD has 1 MB per core, Intel has 2 MB per core.

L3 cache: AMD has 64 MB, Intel has 24 MB shared.

Memory support: AMD is DDR5 only, Intel is DDR4 and DDR5.

Memory bandwidth: AMD has 89.6 GB/s, Intel has no listed value.

ECC: AMD supports ECC, Intel does not.

PCIe: AMD has Gen 5 with 24 CPU-only lanes, Intel has Gen 5 with 8 CPU-only lanes.

Integrated graphics: AMD has Radeon Graphics, Intel has Iris Xe Graphics 64EU.

Market segment: AMD is Desktop, Intel is Mobile.

Release date: AMD is October 6, 2025, Intel is December 17, 2024.

Multiplier: AMD is unlocked, Intel is locked.

Launch MSRP: Intel is $502, AMD has no listed value.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X wins on raw specification counts. It offers 2 more cores and 8 more threads than the Intel part. Its base clock is 1.90 GHz higher and its boost clock is 0.40 GHz higher. It carries 64 MB of L3 cache versus 24 MB, provides 24 PCIe Gen 5 lanes versus 8, supports ECC memory, and uses a newer 4 nm process. Its memory bandwidth is recorded at 89.6 GB/s, a figure the Intel part lacks entirely. These specifications point toward workloads that scale with core count, cache capacity, memory integrity, and high-speed I/O.

The Intel Core 7 240H wins on measured benchmark data. It has a full Cinebench and PassMark suite, an average score of 31,483, and an 82nd percentile ranking. Its nearest rivals are all within 0.1 percent, which confirms that its recorded performance aligns closely with recent mid-range mobile and desktop parts. Its 45 W TDP is 75 W lower than the AMD part, which suggests a more power-restrained design suited to mobile platforms. It also supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, giving platform flexibility that the AMD part does not offer. Its per-core L2 cache is double the AMD part at 2 MB per core, which can benefit latency-sensitive single-thread work.

The data supports a practical split. The AMD processor appears positioned for embedded desktop systems where core count, cache, ECC, and PCIe expansion matter more than measured benchmark scores. The Intel processor appears positioned for mobile systems where a 45 W envelope, dual memory support, and verified multi-thread and single-thread scores are the relevant criteria. The absence of AMD benchmark data means the database cannot confirm whether its architectural advantages translate into actual performance wins. The Intel part remains the only one of the two with demonstrable performance results, and those results place it in a tight competitive cluster around the 31,500 average score mark.