AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X vs Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL Comparison

AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X is a 12-core, 24-thread processor built on the Zen 5 Granite Ridge architecture, manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 4.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz, with a TDP of 120 watts. Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL is an 8-core, 10-thread part from the Core Ultra Series 1, using the Meteor Lake-PS architecture on a 7 nm Intel process. Its base clock is 1.50 GHz, boost clock 4.20 GHz, and TDP is 15 watts. The database records no benchmark scores for the AMD part, with a percentile rank of 50 and an average score of 0. The Intel part has a full benchmark suite, a percentile rank of 68, and an average score of 13061. The head-to-head comparison contains no recorded benchmark entries, so the win counts for both processors are zero. This analysis relies strictly on the recorded specification and benchmark data.

The Verdict

The recorded data presents an unusual situation: one processor has extensive benchmark results, while the other has none. Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL shows a 68th percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 13061. Its nearest rivals in the database are Intel Core i5-9400F with an average score of 13041 (0.2% higher), Intel Core i7-10750H at 13024 (0.3% higher), Intel Core i5-8500 at 13142 (0.6% lower), and Intel Core i7-7700K at 13291 (1.7% lower). These deltas are small, indicating that the Ultra 3 105UL sits in a narrow performance band with those older desktop and mobile parts.

AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X has a percentile of 50, which is the median value, but this is paired with an average benchmark score of 0. The absence of recorded benchmark scores means the database cannot directly compare its computational performance against the Intel part. The AMD processor has a higher core count, higher thread count, significantly higher clocks, and a much higher TDP, but without benchmark data, any performance conclusion would be unsupported.

For the Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL, the data shows a mid-range desktop processor that competes closely with several older Intel Core i5 and i7 models. Its 68th percentile suggests it outperforms roughly two-thirds of all CPUs in the database. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X, with no recorded scores, cannot be ranked against these results. Users seeking a low-power processor with verified benchmark performance would find the Intel part documented. Those considering the AMD part would need to look at its specifications, which indicate a high-core-count, high-clock design, but the database provides no measured evidence of its speed. The launch MSRP for the Intel part is $295, while the AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design approaches. AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X uses the Granite Ridge codename, part of the Zen 5 architecture, and belongs to the Ryzen Embedded generation. It is manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC, with a transistor count of 16,630 million spread across a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL uses the Meteor Lake codename, part of the Meteor Lake-PS architecture, from the Ultra 3 generation. It is built on a 7 nm process at Intel, with no transistor count or die size recorded in the database.

The AMD part has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel part has 8 cores and 10 threads. This thread count difference indicates that the AMD processor supports simultaneous multithreading, effectively doubling its thread count, while the Intel processor has two fewer threads than twice its core count, suggesting a hybrid configuration with performance and efficiency cores. The AMD processor has a base clock of 4.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. The Intel processor has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.20 GHz, with the low base clock typical of a low-power design.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. AMD provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 64 MB of L3 cache. Intel provides 112 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 10 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part has significantly more total cache, especially at the L3 level, with 64 MB versus 10 MB. The Intel part has a larger per-core L1 and L2 cache. The AMD processor uses DDR5 memory with dual-channel support and a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel processor also uses DDR5 with dual-channel support and the same 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, though its memory support is noted as dependent on the motherboard.

Integrated graphics differ. AMD includes Radeon Graphics, while Intel includes Arc Xe-LPG 48EU. The AMD processor supports ECC memory, while the Intel part does not. PCIe capabilities differ as well: AMD offers Gen 5 with 24 lanes (CPU only), while Intel offers Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only). The AMD processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel processor does not. The AMD part uses AMD Socket AM5, while the Intel part uses Intel Socket 1851. The AMD processor was released on 2025-10-06, while the Intel processor was released on 2024-04-07.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no head-to-head benchmark entries between these two processors, and the win counts for both are zero. However, the Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL has its own benchmark results that can be examined. In Cinebench tests, it scores 881 in R15 multicore, 124 in R15 singlecore, 3671 in R20 multicore, 518 in R20 singlecore, 8742 in R23 multicore, and 1234 in R23 singlecore. These scores show a multicore-to-singlecore ratio that reflects its 8-core, 10-thread configuration. The singlecore scores are modest, consistent with a 4.20 GHz boost clock.

PassMark results for the Intel part cover multiple workloads. In data compression, it scores 93961. Data encryption shows 6354. Extended instructions score 5634. Finding prime numbers scores 44. Floating point math scores 30750. Integer math scores 41171. Multithread score is 10285. Physics score is 718. Random string sorting scores 11179. Single thread scores are recorded twice, both at 3382. The multithread score of 10285 combined with the single thread score of 3382 indicates a scaling factor of about three times when moving from single to multithreaded workloads, which is lower than the theoretical 10-thread scaling, suggesting some efficiency losses under full load.

Comparing the Intel part to its nearest rivals, the average scores are very close. The Intel Core i5-9400F has an average score of 13041, which is 0.2% lower than the Ultra 3 105UL. The Intel Core i7-10750H has an average score of 13024, also 0.3% lower. The Intel Core i5-8500 scores 13142, which is 0.6% higher. The Intel Core i7-7700K scores 13291, which is 1.7% higher. These differences are within a few percentage points, placing the Ultra 3 105UL in a tightly contested performance class.

Since the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X has no benchmark scores, the database cannot show how it compares in any specific test. The specification differences suggest it would perform differently, with 12 cores and 24 threads versus 8 cores and 10 threads, and a 5.60 GHz boost clock versus 4.20 GHz, but the measured data does not exist in the database.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specification fields. Core count differs: AMD has 12 cores, Intel has 8 cores. Thread count differs: AMD has 24 threads, Intel has 10 threads. Base clock differs: AMD at 4.40 GHz, Intel at 1.50 GHz. Boost clock differs: AMD at 5.60 GHz, Intel at 4.20 GHz. TDP differs significantly: AMD at 120 watts, Intel at 15 watts. Socket differs: AMD Socket AM5 versus Intel Socket 1851.

Process node differs: AMD uses 4 nm at TSMC, Intel uses 7 nm at Intel. AMD has a recorded transistor count of 16,630 million and a die size of 2x 70.6 mm², while Intel has no transistor count or die size recorded. Cache configuration differs: AMD has 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 64 MB L3; Intel has 112 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 10 MB shared L3. Memory bandwidth is identical at 89.6 GB/s, both dual-channel DDR5. ECC memory support differs: AMD supports ECC, Intel does not. PCIe generation and lanes differ: AMD has Gen 5 with 24 lanes, Intel has Gen 4 with 8 lanes. Integrated graphics differ: AMD has Radeon Graphics, Intel has Arc Xe-LPG 48EU. Multiplier unlock differs: AMD is unlocked, Intel is locked. Release dates differ: AMD on 2025-10-06, Intel on 2024-04-07. Part numbers differ: AMD has 100-000000662E, Intel has SRN9D. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $295, while the AMD part has none recorded.

FAQ

Q: What is the core and thread count difference between the two processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL has 8 cores and 10 threads.

Q: How do the clock speeds compare?

A: The AMD processor has a base clock of 4.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. The Intel processor has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.20 GHz.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X has a TDP of 120 watts. The Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL has a TDP of 15 watts.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL does not support ECC memory.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X has an average benchmark score of 0, with no recorded benchmark results. The Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL has an average benchmark score of 13061.

Q: How does the Intel processor rank against its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL has a percentile of 68. Its nearest rivals are Intel Core i5-9400F at 13041 (0.2% delta), Intel Core i7-10750H at 13024 (0.3% delta), Intel Core i5-8500 at 13142 (-0.6% delta), and Intel Core i7-7700K at 13291 (-1.7% delta).

Where Each One Wins

Based on the recorded data, Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL wins in documented benchmark performance. It has an average benchmark score of 13061, a 68th percentile ranking, and results across Cinebench R15, R20, R23, and PassMark workloads. Its nearest rivals are within a narrow band, with deltas of 0.2%, 0.3%, -0.6%, and -1.7%, indicating consistent performance near those older Intel desktop and mobile parts. The Intel processor also wins in power efficiency specifications, with a 15 watt TDP versus 120 watts for the AMD part. Its base clock of 1.50 GHz is low, reflecting a design optimized for minimal power draw. The Intel part also has a larger per-core L1 and L2 cache, with 112 KB and 2 MB per core respectively, compared to 80 KB and 1 MB for the AMD part.

AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X wins in raw specification counts. It has 12 cores versus 8, 24 threads versus 10, a 5.60 GHz boost clock versus 4.20 GHz, and a 4.40 GHz base clock versus 1.50 GHz. Its L3 cache is 64 MB versus 10 MB. It uses PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes versus Gen 4 with 8 lanes. It supports ECC memory, has an unlocked multiplier, and uses a newer 4 nm process compared to 7 nm. Its transistor count of 16,630 million and die size of 2x 70.6 mm² are recorded, while the Intel part has no such data. The AMD processor also has a more recent release date of 2025-10-06 versus 2024-04-07.

In terms of benchmark wins, the database shows zero wins for both processors because no head-to-head benchmarks exist. The Intel part has individual benchmark scores that place it in the 68th percentile, while the AMD part has no scores at all, sitting at the 50th percentile with an average score of zero. For workloads that benefit from high core counts, high clocks, and large L3 cache, the AMD specification suggests an advantage, but the database provides no measured confirmation. For workloads that require low power consumption, the Intel part's 15 watt TDP is a clear specification advantage. The Intel part also has a recorded launch MSRP of $295, while the AMD part has no launch MSRP in the database. The data supports a conclusion that the Intel processor is a verified mid-range performer, while the AMD processor remains an unmeasured high-specification alternative.