AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D vs Intel Core Ultra 7 255H Comparison

AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D vs Intel Core Ultra 7 255H

The database contains benchmark results for two very different processors: the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D, a high-core-count desktop part with boosted clock speeds and a large L3 cache, and the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H, a mobile processor with a lower power envelope and a higher percentile ranking among all CPUs. The Intel part holds the only recorded benchmark scores in the current data, so the analysis below relies on those figures, the architectural specifications, and the Intel chip’s nearest rival comparisons. The AMD part has no recorded benchmark scores or rival deltas in the database, which limits direct numerical comparison, but the specification differences provide clear context for where each processor is designed to operate.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Direct head-to-head benchmark results are not available for these two processors. The database lists no entries under head-to-head benchmarks, and the win counters for both parts remain at zero. The only measurable performance data comes from the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H, which has a full suite of Cinebench, Geekbench, and PassMark results. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D has no benchmark scores recorded, so no direct numerical comparison can be made from the current dataset.

For the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H, the recorded Cinebench R23 multicore score is 9240, while the single-core score is 1843. The Geekbench multicore score is 14024, and the single-core score is 2335. In PassMark tests, the multithread score is 30703, and the single-thread score is 4317. The floating-point math score is 98796, and the integer math score is 77975. Data compression yields a score of 298850, while data encryption reaches 23395. Extended instructions score 23755, find prime numbers scores 303, random string sorting scores 36058, and physics scores 2254.

These numbers indicate a processor that performs strongly in integer and floating-point workloads, with particularly high throughput in data compression tasks. The single-thread score of 4317 in PassMark suggests respectable per-core performance for a mobile chip, though the boost clock of 5.10 GHz and base clock of 2.00 GHz place it in a different operating range than the AMD part.

The nearest rivals for the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H provide context for its overall standing. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 has an average score of 33542, which is a 0 percent delta relative to the Intel chip. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS and AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX both score 33667 and 33668 respectively, each showing a negative delta of 0.4 percent, meaning they outperform the Intel part by a small margin. The Intel Core i5-12600HX scores 33375, a positive delta of 0.5 percent, indicating the Core Ultra 7 255H is slightly ahead. The Intel part’s percentile versus all CPUs is 83, placing it well above the median, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D sits at the 50th percentile, though that figure is based on no recorded benchmark data.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the recorded data, the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H wins in every measurable benchmark category because it is the only processor with scores in the database. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 9240 and single-core score of 1843 show balanced performance across both threaded and lightly threaded workloads. The Geekbench scores of 14024 multicore and 2335 single-core reinforce this pattern.

The PassMark results reveal specific strengths. Data compression at 298850 is the highest single score among the recorded tests, suggesting the Intel chip handles compression algorithms very efficiently. Floating-point math at 98796 and integer math at 77975 indicate strong arithmetic throughput. The multithread score of 30703 confirms solid parallel processing capability, while the single-thread score of 4317 shows the chip does not sacrifice single-core responsiveness.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D has no benchmark scores, so its wins cannot be established from the database. However, its specifications suggest it would dominate in heavily threaded workloads if tested. With 16 cores and 32 threads, it has exactly double the thread count of the Intel part, which has 16 cores and 16 threads. The AMD chip’s boost clock of 5.70 GHz exceeds the Intel chip’s 5.10 GHz, and its 128 MB of L3 cache is more than five times the Intel chip’s 24 MB shared L3 cache. These factors point toward potential advantages in multi-threaded rendering, scientific computing, and cache-heavy workloads, but no benchmark numbers confirm this.

The Intel part’s higher percentile ranking of 83 versus the AMD part’s 50 suggests that, in the database’s overall CPU population, the Intel chip outperforms the AMD chip in the recorded metrics. Yet this comparison is incomplete because the AMD part lacks any benchmark entries.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D is built on the Granite Ridge architecture, which uses Zen 5 cores. It is manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC, with 16,630 million transistors distributed across two chiplets, each with a die size of 70.6 mm². The L1 cache is 80 KB per core, the L2 cache is 1 MB per core, and the L3 cache is 128 MB. The memory support is DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. It uses the AMD Socket AM5 and has a 170 TDP. The integrated graphics are Radeon Graphics, and the PCIe interface is Gen 5 with 24 lanes from the CPU. It has an unlocked multiplier, meaning overclocking is possible.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H uses the Arrow Lake architecture, specifically Arrow Lake-H, and is built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. Its cache structure differs significantly: L1 cache is 192 KB per core, L2 cache is 3 MB per core, and L3 cache is 24 MB shared. Memory support includes DDR5 and LPDDR5X, with a dual-channel bus and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The socket is Intel BGA 2049, and the TDP is 28. The integrated graphics are Arc Graphics 140T. PCIe is Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The multiplier is locked, so the chip cannot be overclocked.

The process node difference is small, with Intel at 3 nm versus AMD at 4 nm, but both are produced by TSMC. The transistor count and die size are not recorded for the Intel part, so no direct comparison is possible there. The cache hierarchy is fundamentally different: AMD uses a larger per-core L1 and L2 cache, but its L3 cache is massive at 128 MB, likely due to the 3D V-Cache technology implied by the X3D designation, though the database does not explicitly list vCache3d data. Intel’s L1 and L2 caches are larger per core, but its L3 is much smaller. This suggests AMD’s design favors high hit rates for large working sets, while Intel’s design prioritizes lower latency for smaller data.

The TDP difference is stark: 170 watts for the AMD part versus 28 watts for the Intel part. This indicates the AMD chip is designed for sustained high performance in a desktop socket, while the Intel chip targets mobile systems with limited cooling and battery constraints. The AMD part has an unlocked multiplier, enabling tuning, whereas the Intel part is locked.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specification fields. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The base clock is 4.30 GHz for AMD and 2.00 GHz for Intel. The boost clock is 5.70 GHz for AMD and 5.10 GHz for Intel. The TDP is 170 watts for AMD and 28 watts for Intel. The socket is AMD Socket AM5 for AMD and Intel BGA 2049 for Intel. The process node is 4 nm for AMD and 3 nm for Intel. The transistor count is 16,630 million for AMD and not recorded for Intel. The die size is 2x 70.6 mm² for AMD and not recorded for Intel.

Cache sizes differ: L1 is 80 KB per core for AMD and 192 KB per core for Intel. L2 is 1 MB per core for AMD and 3 MB per core for Intel. L3 is 128 MB for AMD and 24 MB shared for Intel. Memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s for AMD and 102.4 GB/s for Intel. Both support DDR5, but Intel also supports LPDDR5X. Both have dual-channel memory buses and ECC memory support. PCIe lanes are 24 for AMD and 20 for Intel, both Gen 5. Integrated graphics are Radeon Graphics for AMD and Arc Graphics 140T for Intel. The market segment is Desktop for AMD and Mobile for Intel. The multiplier is unlocked for AMD and locked for Intel. The release date is 2025-10-06 for AMD and 2025-01-12 for Intel. Neither part has a launch MSRP recorded.

The Intel part has a higher memory bandwidth despite a lower TDP, which is notable. The AMD part has a higher boost clock and far more L3 cache. The Intel part has a higher percentile versus all CPUs at 83, while AMD sits at 50, but again, this is based on no AMD benchmark data.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more threads?

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D has 32 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H has 16 threads. Both have 16 cores, but AMD enables simultaneous multithreading, doubling the thread count.

Q: What is the difference in L3 cache size?

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D has 128 MB of L3 cache, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H has 24 MB of shared L3 cache. This is a 104 MB difference in favor of AMD.

Q: How do the boost clocks compare?

The AMD part boosts to 5.70 GHz, while the Intel part boosts to 5.10 GHz. The AMD chip has a 0.60 GHz higher boost clock.

Q: Which processor has a higher TDP?

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D has a 170 TDP, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H has a 28 TDP. The AMD part consumes significantly more power, indicating a desktop-oriented design.

Q: What memory types are supported?

The AMD part supports DDR5 only. The Intel part supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, giving it flexibility for mobile designs.

Q: Which processor has a higher percentile ranking?

The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H has a percentile versus all CPUs of 83, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D has a percentile of 50. This ranking is based on recorded benchmark data, which only exists for the Intel part.

The Verdict

The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H is the only processor in this comparison with recorded benchmark scores. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 9240, Geekbench multicore score of 14024, and PassMark multithread score of 30703 establish it as a capable mobile processor. Its percentile rank of 83 versus all CPUs confirms it sits above the majority of processors in the database. Its nearest rivals show it trades blows with the AMD Ryzen 5 240, Ryzen 7 8840HS, and Ryzen 5 7645HX, all within a 0.5 percent delta. The Intel chip’s low 28 TDP and support for LPDDR5X make it suitable for thin-and-light laptops.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D has no benchmark scores, so its performance cannot be verified from the database. Its specifications, however, point to a different design philosophy: 32 threads, a 5.70 GHz boost clock, 128 MB of L3 cache, and a 170 TDP. These figures indicate a processor intended for high-performance desktop or embedded workloads where power consumption is not the primary constraint. The unlocked multiplier and AMD Socket AM5 support suggest a user-tunable platform.

For a builder choosing between these two, the decision hinges on the target system. The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H delivers verified performance in a mobile form factor, with measurable scores and a high percentile ranking. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D offers unmatched thread count and cache capacity on paper, but the database provides no evidence of its real-world benchmark results. Without recorded scores, the AMD part cannot be recommended based on measured performance. The data supports the Intel chip as the better-validated option, while the AMD part remains a speculative high-end choice.