AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225F Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D and the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F. The Intel part has a full suite of 17 recorded benchmark scores, while the AMD processor currently carries no benchmark entries. This means any comparison must rely on the architectural and specification data available for both units, plus the Intel chip's measured performance relative to its nearest rivals in the database.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F posts an average benchmark score of 37,313. That places it at the 85th percentile among all CPUs in the database. Its nearest recorded rival, the Intel Core i9-13900HK, scores 37,425, a delta of -0.3%, meaning the Ultra 5 225F trails that mobile flagship by only a hair. Against the AMD Ryzen 7 7735H, which scores 37,161, the Ultra 5 225F leads by 0.4%. The Intel Core i7-13700 sits at 37,135, with the Ultra 5 225F ahead by 0.5%. The AMD Ryzen 7 160 records 37,117, and the Ultra 5 225F again leads by 0.5%. These margins are extremely tight, indicating the Core Ultra 5 225F performs in a narrow band around these established desktop and mobile parts.

Looking at the individual Cinebench results for the Intel chip, the multi-core scores show a clear pattern. Cinebench R23 multi-core returns 16,467 points, while Cinebench R20 multi-core delivers 11,059 and Cinebench R15 multi-core yields 2,660. Single-core results are 1,893 in R23, 1,561 in R20, and 287 in R15. The PassMark suite adds further detail: multi-thread score of 31,004, single-thread score of 4,397, integer math at 66,417, floating point math at 92,554, extended instructions at 28,027, data compression at 310,843, data encryption at 22,648, physics at 2,430, random string sorting at 37,325, and prime number finding at 352.

Because the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D has no recorded benchmark scores, its wins column in the database is zero, and the Intel part also shows zero wins in the head-to-head table. The data does not permit a direct score comparison. What the data does permit is a specification-level analysis, which shows the AMD part has a substantially different configuration. The Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D uses 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 225F uses 10 cores and 10 threads. The AMD part boosts to 5.50 GHz from a 4.40 GHz base, while the Intel part boosts to 4.90 GHz from a 3.30 GHz base. The AMD chip carries 128 MB of L3 cache, the Intel chip 20 MB of shared L3. The AMD part supports ECC memory, the Intel part does not. The AMD part includes Radeon Graphics, the Intel part has no integrated graphics. The AMD part has an unlocked multiplier, the Intel part is locked. These are the measurable differences that define the comparison in the absence of direct benchmarks.

Where Each One Wins

Without head-to-head benchmark data, wins must be inferred from the recorded specifications and the Intel part's measured performance against its nearest rivals. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F wins in any scenario where its existing benchmark scores matter. Its 85th percentile standing and average score of 37,313, which sits within 0.5% of four different rivals, shows it delivers consistent, competitive throughput in the tested workloads. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 16,467 and PassMark multi-thread score of 31,004 indicate strong parallel processing for its 10 threads. The single-thread results, particularly the PassMark single-thread score of 4,397 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1,893, show it handles lightly threaded tasks well.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D wins in specification-based categories. Its 12 cores and 24 threads double the thread count of the Intel part, which matters for heavily threaded software that scales beyond 10 threads. Its 128 MB L3 cache is more than six times larger than the Intel chip's 20 MB, which benefits workloads with large working sets that repeatedly access cached data. Its boost clock of 5.50 GHz exceeds the Intel part's 4.90 GHz, giving it a potential single-thread advantage on paper. Its 120 W TDP versus 65 W TDP indicates it is designed to sustain higher power draw, which typically supports higher sustained performance in demanding workloads. Its ECC memory support and Radeon Graphics provide features the Intel part lacks entirely. Its unlocked multiplier allows overclocking, while the Intel part is locked.

The data shows the Intel part has measurable performance, and the AMD part has measurable capability. The Intel part wins in the category of "verified by benchmark results," while the AMD part wins in the category of "specified for peak throughput and cache capacity." For users who rely on recorded scores, the Intel part is the only one with evidence. For users who plan around core count, cache size, and memory features, the AMD part presents a stronger configuration on paper.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D belongs to the 9000 series, codename Granite Ridge, built on the Zen 5 architecture. Its generation is listed as Ryzen Embedded (Zen 5, Granite Ridge). The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F belongs to Core Ultra Series 2, codename Arrow Lake-S, built on the Arrow Lake architecture. The AMD part uses a 4 nm process node from TSMC, while the Intel part uses a 3 nm process node, also from TSMC. The AMD chip integrates 16,630 million transistors across a die size listed as 2x 70.6 mm². The Intel chip integrates 17,800 million transistors on a single die of 243 mm². The Intel part has more transistors and a much larger die, despite having fewer cores.

Cache architecture differs fundamentally. The AMD part provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 128 MB of L3. The Intel part provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3. The AMD part's L3 is shared across 12 cores, while the Intel part's L3 is shared across 10 cores. Per-core L1 and L2 are larger on the Intel part, but the AMD part's total L3 is dramatically larger. Memory support is DDR5 for both, with dual-channel buses. The AMD part records 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, the Intel part 102.4 GB/s. ECC memory is supported only on the AMD part. PCIe connectivity differs: the AMD part offers Gen 5 with 24 lanes from the CPU, the Intel part offers Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. Integrated graphics are present on the AMD part (Radeon Graphics) and absent on the Intel part (N/A). The AMD part has an unlocked multiplier; the Intel part does not. The AMD part uses AMD Socket AM5, the Intel part uses Intel Socket 1851.

The production status is Active for both. Release dates differ: the AMD part is dated 2025-10-06, the Intel part 2025-01-06. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $231, stated once here as the launch MSRP. The AMD part has no launch MSRP recorded. The Intel part's part number is SRQD2SRVF9, the AMD part's is 100-000001368E.

The Verdict

The recorded data supports a clear verdict for users who prioritize measured performance: the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F is the only part with benchmark scores, and those scores place it at the 85th percentile, with an average score of 37,313 and margins within 0.5% of four capable rivals. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 16,467 and PassMark multi-thread score of 31,004 demonstrate solid throughput, and its single-thread results are respectable. For anyone who needs verified performance data, the Intel part is the choice.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D offers a specification profile that suggests higher theoretical ceilings. Its 12 cores and 24 threads, 128 MB L3 cache, 5.50 GHz boost clock, ECC support, Radeon Graphics, and unlocked multiplier give it advantages on paper. But the database contains no benchmark results for it, so there is no evidence it translates those specifications into measured wins. The Intel part has a lower TDP (65 W versus 120 W), higher memory bandwidth (102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s), and a smaller process node (3 nm versus 4 nm), along with a larger per-core L1 and L2 cache.

Users who require ECC memory, integrated graphics, or overclocking must choose the AMD part, as those features are absent from the Intel part. Users who require verified benchmark scores, lower power draw, or a launch MSRP of $231 must choose the Intel part. The data does not allow a performance ranking between the two, because only one has measured results. The verdict is therefore conditional: pick the Intel part for measured performance and efficiency, pick the AMD part for feature set and raw specification headroom, but understand that the AMD part's performance is unverified in this database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F has 10 cores and 10 threads.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds?

A: The AMD part boosts to 5.50 GHz from a 4.40 GHz base. The Intel part boosts to 4.90 GHz from a 3.30 GHz base.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F does not.

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F have integrated graphics?

A: No. The Intel part lists integrated graphics as N/A. The AMD part includes Radeon Graphics.

Q: What is the Intel part's average benchmark score and percentile?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F has an average benchmark score of 37,313 and sits at the 85th percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the Intel part?

A: The launch MSRP of the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F is $231. The AMD part has no launch MSRP recorded.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D has 128 MB of L3 cache. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F has 20 MB of shared L3.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D | Intel Core Ultra 5 225F |

| --- | --- | --- |

| Cores | 12 | 10 |

| Threads | 24 | 10 |

| Base clock | 4.40 GHz | 3.30 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.50 GHz | 4.90 GHz |

| TDP | 120 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM5 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Codename | Granite Ridge | Arrow Lake-S |

| Process node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Transistors | 16,630 million | 17,800 million |

| Die size | 2x 70.6 mm² | 243 mm² |

| L1 cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 128 MB | 20 MB (shared) |

| Memory bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 24 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon Graphics | N/A |

| Multiplier unlocked | Yes | No |

| Release date | 2025-10-06 | 2025-01-06 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $231 |