AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X vs Intel Core Ultra 5 338H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents an unambiguous picture: the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X wins all 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons against the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H. The margins, however, vary dramatically depending on the workload type.

In multi-threaded rendering, the Threadripper dominates by an order of magnitude. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a score of 130529 for the AMD part versus 16331 for the Intel, a 699.3% advantage. The gap widens further in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the Threadripper scores 13157 against 2504, a 425.4% difference. Cinebench R20 multi-core follows the same trend: 54822 versus 10213, a 436.8% lead.

The largest single delta appears in PassMark integer math. The Threadripper produces 872071 points against 64934 for the Ultra 5, a 1243% advantage. Data compression shows a similar pattern with 2974534 versus 276539, a 975.6% gap. Extended instructions follow at 228959 versus 23906, an 857.7% difference. Random string sorting delivers 292083 versus 34082, a 757% lead. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 18427 versus 2044, an 801.5% gap, which is notable because single-core tests typically narrow the distance between disparate processor classes.

The narrowest margin appears in PassMark single-thread tests. Here the Threadripper scores 4537 and the Ultra 5 scores 4180, a modest 8.5% advantage. This is the only benchmark where the two processors approach parity. It indicates that per-core performance on the AMD part is competitive with the Intel mobile chip, despite the vast difference in core counts and target markets.

Other multi-thread workloads reinforce the pattern. PassMark multi-thread shows 141641 versus 28717, a 393.2% lead. Floating point math delivers 559003 versus 84067, a 564.9% gap. Data encryption shows 157137 versus 21367, a 635.4% difference. Physics simulation records 8001 versus 2697, a 196.7% lead. Find prime numbers is the smallest multi-thread margin at 769 versus 304, a 153% advantage.

The average benchmark score for the Threadripper sits at 321753, placing it in the 99th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Ultra 5 averages 33989, in the 84th percentile. The Threadripper's nearest rivals are all server or workstation parts: the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX at 320749 (0.3% behind), the Intel Xeon 6781P at 315524 (2% behind), the AMD EPYC 9575F at 311774 (3.2% behind), and the AMD EPYC 9734 at 310619 (3.6% behind). The Ultra 5's nearest rivals are mobile and server parts: the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H at 34083 (0.3% ahead), the Intel Core i7-12800HX at 33875 (0.3% behind), the Intel Xeon 6353P at 33844 (0.4% behind), and the AMD EPYC 4244P at 34220 (0.7% ahead).

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies and manufacturing processes. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X uses the Zen 5 architecture with the codename Shimada Peak, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It packs 64 cores and 128 threads, with a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The thermal design power is 350 watts, appropriate for a desktop workstation part. It fits the AMD Socket sTR5 platform.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H uses the Panther Lake architecture, also with the codename Panther Lake, built on a 3 nm process at Intel's own foundry. It has 12 cores and 12 threads, meaning no hyperthreading or equivalent technology. The base clock is 1.90 GHz and the boost clock reaches 4.70 GHz. The thermal design power is 25 watts, reflecting its mobile BGA 2540 socket and laptop-oriented design.

Cache configurations differ significantly. The Threadripper provides 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and a massive 256 MB L3 cache. The Ultra 5 offers 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. While the Intel part has larger per-core L1 and L2 allocations, the AMD part's total cache capacity is substantially higher, driven by the 256 MB L3.

Memory support reflects the market split. The Threadripper uses DDR5 with a quad-channel memory bus and 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth. It supports ECC memory. The Ultra 5 uses LPDDR5X with a dual-channel bus and 136.5 GB/s of bandwidth, and it does not support ECC. The Threadripper also provides 80 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU, while the Ultra 5 provides 4 PCIe Gen 5 lanes.

The Intel part includes integrated graphics, specifically Arc B370. The AMD part has no integrated graphics. The Threadripper has an unlocked multiplier, while the Ultra 5 is locked. The Threadripper's transistor count is recorded at 66,520 million across 8 dies of 70.6 mm² each; the Ultra 5's transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split by use case. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X is a workstation-class processor for heavily multi-threaded workloads. Its 128 threads, 256 MB L3 cache, and 350 W TDP target sustained rendering, simulation, and data processing tasks. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 130529 and the PassMark integer math score of 872071 confirm that this part is built for throughput.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H is a mobile processor with a 25 W TDP, designed for laptops where power efficiency and compact packaging matter more than raw core counts. Its 12 threads and 18 MB L3 cache serve lighter workloads, and its integrated Arc B370 graphics remove the need for a discrete GPU in basic configurations.

Neither processor is a substitute for the other. The Threadripper requires a desktop sTR5 platform and a substantial cooling solution given its 350 W TDP. The Ultra 5 is soldered to a BGA 2540 mobile board and cannot be used in a desktop socket. The benchmark scores reflect this: the Threadripper wins every recorded test, but the Ultra 5 operates in a completely different power envelope and market segment.

The 84th percentile ranking for the Ultra 5 shows it is still a capable processor among all CPUs in the database, but the 99th percentile ranking for the Threadripper places it at the very top of the performance distribution. The average benchmark scores, 321753 versus 33989, quantify the difference in absolute capability.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every recorded specification category. The Threadripper has 64 cores and 128 threads; the Ultra 5 has 12 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks are 3.20 GHz versus 1.90 GHz, and boost clocks are 5.40 GHz versus 4.70 GHz. The TDP is 350 W versus 25 W. The socket is AMD Socket sTR5 versus Intel BGA 2540.

The architecture is Zen 5 (Shimada Peak) versus Panther Lake. The process node is 4 nm at TSMC versus 3 nm at Intel. L1 cache is 64 KB per core versus 192 KB per core. L2 cache is 1 MB per core versus 2.5 MB per core. L3 cache is 256 MB versus 18 MB shared. Memory support is DDR5 quad-channel versus LPDDR5X dual-channel, with bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s versus 136.5 GB/s. ECC support is present on the AMD part and absent on the Intel part. PCIe lanes are 80 Gen 5 lanes versus 4 Gen 5 lanes. Integrated graphics are absent on the AMD part and present as Arc B370 on the Intel part. The market segment is Desktop versus Mobile. The multiplier is unlocked versus locked.

The release dates differ as well. The Threadripper was released on 2025-07-29 with a launch MSRP of $4999. The Ultra 5 was released on 2026-01-04 with no recorded launch MSRP. The part numbers are 100-000001593 for the AMD and SA4REQ9EW for the Intel.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X has 64 cores and 128 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has 12 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What is the largest benchmark margin between the two?

A: The largest recorded margin is in PassMark integer math, where the Threadripper scores 872071 versus 64934, a 1243% advantage.

Q: Is there any benchmark where the Intel part comes close?

A: The closest result is in PassMark single-thread, where the Threadripper scores 4537 and the Ultra 5 scores 4180, a difference of 8.5%.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Threadripper provides 204.8 GB/s over a quad-channel DDR5 bus, while the Ultra 5 provides 136.5 GB/s over a dual-channel LPDDR5X bus.

Q: Does either processor include integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H includes Arc B370 integrated graphics. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X has no integrated graphics.

Q: What are the thermal design power ratings?

A: The Threadripper is rated at 350 W TDP, and the Ultra 5 is rated at 25 W TDP.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X wins in every recorded benchmark category. The strongest cases are multi-threaded rendering, data compression, encryption, extended instructions, integer math, floating point math, multi-thread throughput, physics simulation, and random string sorting. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 130529 and the PassMark data compression score of 2974534 are the standout figures for this part. The 350 W TDP and 80 PCIe Gen 5 lanes indicate a platform designed for heavy, sustained compute workloads with multiple expansion cards.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H wins in no recorded benchmark category, but its strengths are contextual. The 25 W TDP makes it suitable for battery-powered mobile systems. The integrated Arc B370 graphics provide display output and basic GPU acceleration without a discrete card. The BGA 2540 socket and LPDDR5X memory support point to a compact, low-power laptop design. The 84th percentile ranking confirms it is not a weak processor in absolute terms, but it operates in a completely different performance tier from the Threadripper.

The practical choice depends entirely on the platform. For a desktop workstation handling rendering, simulation, or data processing, the Threadripper's 128 threads and 256 MB L3 cache deliver the required throughput, and the 99th percentile ranking confirms its position at the top of the database. For a laptop where power draw and physical size are constraints, the Ultra 5's 12 cores and integrated graphics provide a balanced mobile package, even if it cannot match the desktop part's raw scores. The data does not suggest that one is "better" in an absolute sense; it shows two processors engineered for different environments, with the AMD part dominating in every measured performance metric.