AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D vs Intel Core Ultra 5 228V Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database contains no recorded benchmark scores for the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V has an extensive set of measured results. This makes direct comparison difficult, but the available data still provides meaningful context. The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V posts an average benchmark score of 21440, placing it in the 75th percentile among all CPUs tracked in the database.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V shows its strongest results in multi-threaded workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 9932 points, while its single-core score is 1758. The Cinebench R20 results show 6491 multi-core and 916 single-core, and the older Cinebench R15 test records 1502.5 multi-core with 267 single-core. These results indicate a balanced performance profile, with the multi-core scores roughly 5.6 times higher than single-core in R23, reflecting the chip's 8-core, 8-thread configuration.

PassMark results for the Intel part are equally detailed. The multi-thread score is 18227, and single-thread performance registers 3836. Specific workload tests show 53310 in floating-point math, 39679 in integer math, 173924 in data compression, 13032 in data encryption, 14801 in extended instructions, 168 in prime number finding, 1538 in physics, and 21254 in random string sorting. These figures span a wide range of computational tasks, from memory-heavy operations to pure arithmetic.

The nearest rivals in the database provide useful reference points for the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V. The AMD Ryzen 5 2600 scores 21484, which is 0.2 percent higher than the Intel part. The Intel Core i9-11900H scores 21367, putting the Ultra 5 228V 0.3 percent ahead. The Intel Xeon D-1746TER scores 21635, meaning the Ultra 5 228V trails by 0.9 percent. The AMD EPYC 9454 scores 21223, with the Ultra 5 228V 1 percent ahead. These deltas are narrow, placing the Intel chip in a tight competitive cluster.

Since the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D has no benchmark entries, its percentile versus all CPUs is recorded at 50, and its average benchmark score is 0. The head-to-head comparison table is empty, and neither processor registers a win in the wins column. The database shows the Intel part with 17 discrete benchmark results, while the AMD part has none, so quantitative comparison between the two is limited to their architectural specifications rather than measured performance.

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score for the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V?

A: The database records an average benchmark score of 21440 for the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 2600, scores 21484, a difference of 0.2 percent.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V compare to its closest rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V sits between several competitors. It is 0.3 percent ahead of the Intel Core i9-11900H (21367), 1 percent ahead of the AMD EPYC 9454 (21223), 0.2 percent behind the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 (21484), and 0.9 percent behind the Intel Xeon D-1746TER (21635).

Q: What benchmark scores are available for the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D?

A: The database contains no benchmark entries for the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D. Its average benchmark score is listed as 0, and its percentile versus all CPUs is 50. No Cinebench or PassMark results are recorded.

Q: What is the transistor count for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D uses 16,630 million transistors across a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V has no transistor count listed in the database.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V does not support ECC memory.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for these two processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D has 16 cores and 32 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V has 8 cores and 8 threads.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D belongs to the 9000 series and uses the Granite Ridge codename, built on the Zen 5 architecture with a 4 nm process node from TSMC. The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V is part of the Core Ultra Series 2, codenamed Lunar Lake, using a 3 nm process node also from TSMC. Both are manufactured by TSMC, but the Intel part uses a more advanced node.

Core configuration differs sharply. The AMD part provides 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel part offers 8 cores and 8 threads. The AMD processor has simultaneous multithreading, doubling its thread count, whereas the Intel chip has no hyperthreading, matching threads to cores one-to-one. Clock speeds reflect this split: the AMD part runs at a 4.30 GHz base clock with a 5.70 GHz boost, while the Intel part runs at 2.10 GHz base and 4.50 GHz boost. The AMD chip is designed for high sustained throughput, the Intel chip for efficiency.

Cache hierarchies are also distinct. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D uses 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 cache per core, with a substantial 128 MB of L3 cache. The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V uses a larger L1 cache at 192 KB per core and 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, but only 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part's 128 MB L3 cache is 16 times larger than the Intel part's 8 MB, a massive difference for workloads that benefit from large on-chip data storage.

Memory support also diverges. The AMD processor supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus and 89.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth, along with ECC memory support. The Intel processor's memory support is listed as unknown and dependent on the motherboard, though it also uses a dual-channel bus. The Intel part does not support ECC memory. The AMD part offers PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel part offers PCIe Gen 5 with only 4 lanes from the CPU, a significant difference in expansion capability.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D includes Radeon Graphics, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V includes Arc 130V. The AMD part has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking, while the Intel part is locked. The AMD processor uses the AMD Socket AM5, whereas the Intel processor uses Intel BGA 2833, reflecting their desktop versus mobile market segments. The AMD part is a desktop processor, and the Intel part is a mobile processor.

The Verdict

The data supports clear conclusions for each processor's intended role. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D is a desktop processor with 16 cores, 32 threads, a 5.70 GHz boost clock, 128 MB of L3 cache, and ECC memory support. It targets workloads requiring high core counts, large cache capacity, and memory reliability. The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V is a mobile processor with 8 cores, 8 threads, a 4.50 GHz boost clock, and a 3 nm process node, designed for efficiency and portability.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V has verified performance data, an average benchmark score of 21440, and a 75th percentile ranking among all CPUs. Its nearest rivals cluster within 1 percent of its score, indicating solid mid-pack performance. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D has no benchmark data, so its performance cannot be confirmed from the database. Its 50th percentile ranking is a placeholder, not a measured result.

The choice between these processors depends on usage context. For a desktop system requiring maximum parallel processing, the AMD part's 16 cores and 32 threads, combined with its 128 MB L3 cache and 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, provide the structural foundation for heavy multi-threaded work. For a mobile system where power efficiency matters, the Intel part's 17 W TDP, 3 nm process, and 8-core design offer a more compact solution. The AMD part's 170 W TDP indicates a high-power desktop component, while the Intel part's 17 W TDP points to a low-power mobile chip.

The AMD processor's unlocked multiplier and Socket AM5 platform suit enthusiasts and embedded system builders who want flexibility. The Intel processor's locked multiplier and BGA 2833 socket suit integrated mobile designs where upgrades are not expected. The AMD part's 24 PCIe Gen 5 lanes support extensive expansion, while the Intel part's 4 lanes limit connectivity to basic mobile needs.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification field. Core count: 16 for AMD versus 8 for Intel. Thread count: 32 for AMD versus 8 for Intel. Base clock: 4.30 GHz for AMD versus 2.10 GHz for Intel. Boost clock: 5.70 GHz for AMD versus 4.50 GHz for Intel. TDP: 170 W for AMD versus 17 W for Intel. Socket: AMD Socket AM5 for AMD versus Intel BGA 2833 for Intel.

Process node: 4 nm for AMD versus 3 nm for Intel. Foundry is TSMC for both. Transistor count: 16,630 million for AMD, no data for Intel. Die size: 2x 70.6 mm² for AMD, no data for Intel. L1 cache: 80 KB per core for AMD versus 192 KB per core for Intel. L2 cache: 1 MB per core for AMD versus 2.5 MB per core for Intel. L3 cache: 128 MB for AMD versus 8 MB shared for Intel.

Memory support: DDR5 for AMD, unknown and motherboard-dependent for Intel. Memory bus: dual-channel for both. Memory bandwidth: 89.6 GB/s for AMD, no data for Intel. ECC memory: supported by AMD, not supported by Intel. PCIe: Gen 5 with 24 lanes for AMD versus Gen 5 with 4 lanes for Intel. Integrated graphics: Radeon Graphics for AMD versus Arc 130V for Intel.

Market segment: Desktop for AMD versus Mobile for Intel. Production status: Active for both. Release date: 2025-10-06 for AMD versus 2024-09-23 for Intel. Multiplier: unlocked for AMD, locked for Intel. Part number: 100-000000719E for AMD versus SRPMVSRPMU for Intel. Codename: Granite Ridge for AMD versus Lunar Lake for Intel. Generation: Ryzen Embedded (Zen 5) for AMD versus Ultra 5 (Lunar Lake) for Intel.