AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X vs Intel Core Ultra 5 336H 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 Ultra 5 336H. The AMD processor has no recorded benchmark scores, while the Intel part has a full suite of Cinebench and PassMark results. This means the comparison is necessarily one-sided for measured performance data.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23,991 and a single-core score of 3,387. In Cinebench R20, it scores 10,076 multi-core and 1,422 single-core. The older Cinebench R15 run shows 2,418 multi-core and 341 single-core. These results place the chip at the 84th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 34,485.

The nearest rivals for the Intel chip provide useful context. The Intel Core i7-13700HX averages 34,554, which is 0.2 percent higher, making it effectively a tie. The Intel Core i5-13450HX scores 34,333, a 0.4 percent gap. The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X averages 34,260, trailing by 0.7 percent, and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 scores 34,222, a 0.8 percent deficit. The Core Ultra 5 336H sits in a tight cluster where no rival is more than one percent away in either direction.

PassMark results for the Intel part are extensive. Multi-thread performance scores 28,545, while single-thread performance scores 4,013. Integer math reaches 62,070, floating-point math reaches 82,415, and extended instructions score 24,542. Data encryption scores 21,291, data compression scores 280,340, and random string sorting scores 34,402. Physics processing scores 2,682, and prime number finding scores 299.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, so no measured wins can be attributed to it. The processor does have an average benchmark score of zero and sits at the 50th percentile, which reflects an absence of data rather than a performance evaluation. The Intel part, by contrast, has a substantial body of results across multiple test generations, making its performance profile well-characterized.

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H compare to its nearest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The Intel chip averages 34,485. The Intel Core i7-13700HX is 0.2 percent higher at 34,554, the Intel Core i5-13450HX is 0.4 percent lower at 34,333, the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X is 0.7 percent lower at 34,260, and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 is 0.8 percent lower at 34,222.

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

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The AMD part uses simultaneous multithreading, the Intel part does not.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X boosts to 5.60 GHz, compared to 4.60 GHz for the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H. The AMD part also has a higher base clock at 4.40 GHz versus 1.90 GHz.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H does not.

Q: What is the L3 cache capacity for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X has 64 MB of L3 cache, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor has a higher memory bandwidth rating?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H is rated at 115.2 GB/s, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X is rated at 89.6 GB/s. Both use dual-channel memory buses and support DDR5, but the Intel part also supports LPDDR5X.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split by use case. The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H is the only one of the two with measured benchmark results, and those results place it in the 84th percentile among all CPUs, with an average score of 34,485. Its nearest rivals are all within one percent, indicating competitive performance for its mobile segment. The 16-core, 16-thread configuration, 115.2 GB/s memory bandwidth, and 3 nm Panther Lake architecture make it a solid choice for mobile workloads where the recorded scores demonstrate strong multi-threaded and single-threaded capability.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X has no recorded benchmark data, so no performance claims can be made from measurements. What the specification sheet shows is a 12-core, 24-thread desktop processor with a 5.60 GHz boost clock, 64 MB of L3 cache, ECC memory support, and PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes. These features position it for embedded and workstation scenarios where ECC reliability, high clock speeds, and large cache matter more than measured multi-thread scores.

For a user choosing between them strictly on recorded data, the Intel part is the only one with performance validation. For a user prioritizing ECC memory, higher boost clocks, and a desktop socket with unlockable multiplier, the AMD part has attributes the Intel part lacks.

Specification Differences

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X uses 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H uses 16 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks differ substantially: 4.40 GHz for AMD versus 1.90 GHz for Intel. Boost clocks are 5.60 GHz for AMD and 4.60 GHz for Intel. TDP ratings are 120 watts for AMD and 25 watts for Intel. The AMD part uses AMD Socket AM5, the Intel part uses Intel BGA 2540. Memory support is DDR5 for AMD, while Intel supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s for AMD and 115.2 GB/s for Intel. ECC memory is supported by AMD but not by Intel. PCIe lanes are 24 for AMD and 12 for Intel, both Gen 5. Integrated graphics differ: Radeon Graphics for AMD, Intel Xe3 Graphics for Intel. The AMD multiplier is unlocked, the Intel multiplier is locked. Release dates differ, with AMD listed for October 2025 and Intel for January 2026.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC, using the Granite Ridge codename from the Ryzen Embedded generation based on Zen 5. It contains 16,630 million transistors across a dual-chiplet design with two 70.6 mm² dies. The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H uses a 3 nm process at Intel's own foundry, with the Panther Lake codename from the Ultra 5 generation, specifically Panther Lake-H. The Intel part does not have transistor or die size data recorded.

Cache layouts differ markedly. The AMD part has 80 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, with 64 MB of L3. The Intel part has 192 KB of L1 per core and 2.5 MB of L2 per core, with 18 MB of shared L3. The AMD processor has a larger total cache pool, particularly at the L3 level, while the Intel processor has larger per-core L1 and L2 allocations.

The AMD processor is classified as a desktop market segment part, while the Intel part is classified as mobile. Both are currently active in production. The AMD part carries part number 100-000000662E, and the Intel part carries part number SA4RD. The AMD processor is in the 9000 series, and the Intel processor is in the Core Ultra Series 3.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H wins on measured performance, as it is the only processor with recorded benchmarks. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23,991 and single-core score of 3,387 demonstrate strong results across both parallel and single-threaded workloads. PassMark multi-thread performance of 28,545 and single-thread performance of 4,013 confirm the pattern. The 84th percentile ranking and average score of 34,485, with nearest rivals within one percent, indicate the chip performs at a level comparable to established desktop and high-end mobile processors from previous generations. The 115.2 GB/s memory bandwidth and support for LPDDR5X give it an advantage in memory-heavy mobile workloads. The 25-watt TDP makes it suitable for power-constrained mobile systems.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X wins on specification-driven attributes. The 5.60 GHz boost clock is the highest clock speed recorded between the two. The 64 MB L3 cache is more than three times the Intel part's 18 MB. ECC memory support is present on the AMD part and absent on the Intel part, which matters for embedded reliability. The 24 PCIe Gen 5 lanes double the Intel part's 12 lanes, enabling more expansion capacity. The unlocked multiplier allows frequency adjustment, which the locked Intel part does not permit. The 120-watt TDP, while higher, reflects a desktop-class power envelope that supports sustained high-clock operation. The desktop socket format allows for system integration that the mobile BGA package does not.

The Intel part is the choice for workloads where measured multi-thread and single-thread scores are the deciding factor, such as content creation, compilation, and general productivity on mobile platforms. The AMD part is the choice for embedded deployments where ECC memory, high clock speeds, large L3 cache, and PCIe lane count take priority over recorded benchmark scores. Each processor addresses a different market segment, and the recorded data only validates one of them.