AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9960X vs Intel Core Ultra X7 368H Comparison

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9960X and Intel Core Ultra X7 368H occupy opposite ends of the processor spectrum, one a 24-core desktop workstation part and the other a 16-thread mobile chip. The benchmark data available for the Intel part, combined with the architectural specifications of both, reveals how far apart these two designs are in intent and capability.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Direct comparison data between the two processors is limited, as the Ryzen Threadripper 9960X has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H, however, has a complete set of Cinebench and PassMark results. Its average benchmark score sits at 40518, placing it in the 87th percentile of all CPUs in the database.

The Intel part shows strong multi-threaded performance for a mobile chip. In Cinebench R23, it recorded a multi-core score of 28221 and a single-core score of 3984. The R20 run produced 11852 multi-core and 1673 single-core. The R15 results were 2844 multi-core and 401 single-core. These numbers indicate a processor that scales well across its 16 threads, with the multi-core to single-core ratio in R23 at roughly 7:1.

PassMark results for the Intel chip show specific workload characteristics. The data compression score reached 312927, while data encryption hit 25228. Extended instructions scored 25669, and floating point math reached 105681. Integer math delivered 88083, and the find prime numbers test produced a score of 321. Random string sorting scored 38093. The multithread PassMark score was 32956, with physics at 2857 and single thread at 4005.

The nearest rivals to the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H, based on average benchmark score, are all within a fraction of a percent. The Intel Core 7 253PE scores 40557, which is 0.1 percent ahead. The Intel Core 5 223PE scores 40585, also 0.2 percent ahead. The AMD Ryzen 9 7940H scores 40431, which is 0.2 percent behind, and the Intel Xeon 6507P scores 40426, also 0.2 percent behind. The spread between the highest and lowest rival is less than 0.5 percent, indicating the Ultra X7 368H sits in a tightly packed performance cluster.

Because the Ryzen Threadripper 9960X has no benchmark entries, the database records zero wins for either processor in a head-to-head comparison. The absence of data for the AMD part means no direct score comparisons can be drawn between the two. The analysis must rely on the architectural specifications to understand the performance envelope of the Threadripper.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge at every level of their design. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9960X uses the Zen 5 architecture with the codename Shimada Peak, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It packs 33,260 million transistors across four chiplets, each 70.6 mm² in die size. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H uses the Panther Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process at Intel's own foundry.

Core counts differ substantially. The Threadripper has 24 cores and 48 threads, while the Ultra X7 has 16 cores and 16 threads. The AMD part has simultaneous multithreading, doubling its threads, while the Intel part does not. Base clocks tell a similar story: the Threadripper runs at 4.20 GHz with a 5.30 GHz boost, while the Ultra X7 runs at 2.00 GHz with a 5.00 GHz boost. The higher base clock on the AMD part suggests sustained throughput, while the Intel part relies more on boost behavior.

Cache hierarchies reflect the different design philosophies. The Threadripper has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a massive 128 MB of L3 cache. The Ultra X7 has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The total cache capacity on the AMD part is far larger, which matters for workloads that repeatedly access large data sets.

Memory support also differs. The Threadripper uses DDR5 with a quad-channel memory bus, providing 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The Ultra X7 uses LPDDR5X with a dual-channel bus, providing 153.6 GB/s. The AMD part supports ECC memory, while the Intel part does not. For workstation workloads that require data integrity, this is a meaningful distinction.

Power and packaging are at opposite extremes. The Threadripper has a TDP of 350 watts and uses the AMD Socket sTR5. The Ultra X7 has a TDP of 25 watts and uses the Intel BGA 2540 socket, which is soldered to the motherboard. The Threadripper is a desktop part with an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking. The Ultra X7 is a mobile part with a locked multiplier.

PCIe connectivity shows another major gap. The Threadripper provides Gen 5 with 80 lanes from the CPU, enabling multiple high-bandwidth expansion cards. The Ultra X7 provides Gen 5 with only 4 lanes. The integrated graphics also differ: the Threadripper has none, while the Ultra X7 includes the Arc B390.

Release timing places these parts roughly six months apart. The Threadripper launched on July 29, 2025, with a launch MSRP of $1499. The Ultra X7 launched on January 4, 2026. Both are listed as active in production.

FAQ

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9960X has 24 cores and 48 threads. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has 16 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What is the process node for each chip?

A: The Threadripper 9960X uses a 4 nm process from TSMC. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H uses a 3 nm process from Intel.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Threadripper 9960X has 128 MB of L3 cache. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it includes the Arc B390 integrated graphics. The AMD Threadripper 9960X has no integrated graphics.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each processor support?

A: The Threadripper 9960X supports 204.8 GB/s via quad-channel DDR5. The Ultra X7 supports 153.6 GB/s via dual-channel LPDDR5X.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Threadripper 9960X has a TDP of 350 watts. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has a TDP of 25 watts.

The Verdict

The data shows two processors built for entirely different environments. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9960X, with its 24 cores, 48 threads, 128 MB of L3 cache, quad-channel DDR5, and 80 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, targets sustained multi-threaded workstation workloads. Its 350 watt TDP and desktop socket indicate a system designed for maximum throughput without power constraints. The unlocked multiplier allows tuning, and ECC memory support suits data-sensitive applications.

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H, by contrast, delivers competitive benchmark results within a 25 watt envelope. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 28221 and PassMark multithread score of 32956 demonstrate that a mobile processor can handle substantial parallel work. The single-core R23 score of 3984 shows strong per-thread performance, aided by the 5.00 GHz boost clock. Its position in the 87th percentile of all CPUs, surrounded by rivals within 0.2 percent in average score, confirms it sits in a well-populated performance tier.

The choice between them depends on the workload and platform. The Threadripper 9960X offers 48 threads, a 128 MB L3 cache, and 80 PCIe lanes, making it suited for rendering, compilation, and heavy multi-tasking with multiple expansion devices. The Ultra X7 368H offers a complete mobile package with integrated graphics, 16 threads, and a 153.6 GB/s memory bus, appropriate for laptops where power efficiency and portability are primary. The recorded benchmark scores for the Ultra X7 indicate it handles general productivity and moderate compute tasks comfortably. The absence of benchmark data for the Threadripper means its measured performance cannot be stated, but its architectural resources are substantially larger in every capacity metric.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9960X | Intel Core Ultra X7 368H |

|:---|:---|:---|

| Series | 9000 series | Core Ultra Series 3 |

| Cores | 24 | 16 |

| Threads | 48 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 4.20 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.30 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 350 W | 25 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket sTR5 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Panther Lake |

| Codename | Shimada Peak | Panther Lake |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 128 MB | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus | Quad-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 204.8 GB/s | 153.6 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 80 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 4 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | N/A | Arc B390 |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Release Date | 2025-07-29 | 2026-01-04 |

| Launch MSRP | $1499 | None recorded |

| Transistors | 33,260 million | Not recorded |

| Die Size | 4x 70.6 mm² | Not recorded |

The specification table shows that every major component differs between the two. The Threadripper offers more cores, threads, cache, memory channels, PCIe lanes, and a higher base clock. The Ultra X7 offers a smaller process node, higher per-core L1 and L2 cache, integrated graphics, and dramatically lower power consumption. The launch MSRP of $1499 for the Threadripper reflects its workstation positioning, while the Ultra X7 has no recorded launch price. The production status for both is active, and the Threadripper's part number is 100-000001595, while the Ultra X7's is SA4R7Q9EJ.

The benchmark percentile data places the Ultra X7 at 87 percent of all CPUs, a strong result for a mobile part. Its average benchmark score of 40518 and the tight clustering of its nearest rivals indicate consistent performance across the four closest competitors. The Threadripper's percentile of 50 and average score of zero reflect the lack of recorded benchmarks, not a statement about its capability. The architectural data, particularly the 48 threads and 128 MB of L3 cache, suggests it operates in a performance class well above the mobile chip, but the database currently contains no measurements to confirm that.