AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX vs Intel Core Ultra X7 358H Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly along workload type, though the split is heavily one-sided. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX wins 17 of the 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H does not take a single recorded win. That does not mean the Intel part has no purpose; rather, the data indicates that the AMD processor dominates in every measured category, but the margin varies dramatically by task.

The largest gaps appear in heavily threaded and cache-sensitive workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD part scores 59494 against 18747 for the Intel chip, a delta of 217.4%. Similarly, PassMark data compression shows 920954 versus 332508, a 177% advantage. These are workloads where the AMD processor's 32 threads and 64 MB of L3 cache provide a decisive structural edge.

Single-threaded performance tells a more nuanced story. The AMD part still wins, but the margin shrinks considerably. PassMark single-thread scores are 4530 versus 4124, a delta of only 9.8%. The Cinebench R23 single-core gap is larger at 303.8%, but that specific test appears to favor the AMD architecture more heavily. The narrow PassMark single-thread margin suggests that in lightly threaded daily tasks, the two processors are closer than the multi-core results imply.

The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H does have one notable strength in the recorded data: its PassMark find prime numbers score ties the AMD part at 337. This is the only test where the Intel processor matches its rival, and the 0% delta indicates a genuine parity in that specific mathematical workload. It is a small win for the Intel part, though the database records it as an AMD win due to the winner assignment logic.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, codenamed Shimada Peak. It is a desktop part built for AMD Socket sTR5. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H uses a 3 nm Intel process, codenamed Panther Lake, and is a mobile part on Intel BGA 2540. The process node advantage nominally belongs to Intel at 3 nm versus 4 nm, but the benchmark data does not show that advantage translating into performance leadership.

Core counts are identical at 16 cores, but threading differs fundamentally. The AMD part supports 32 threads, meaning each core can process two threads simultaneously. The Intel part supports only 16 threads, one per core. This explains much of the multi-core performance gap in the recorded benchmarks. The AMD processor also carries a large L3 cache of 64 MB, while the Intel part has 18 MB shared across the chip. Per-core L1 and L2 caches also differ: the AMD part has 64 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 per core, while the Intel part has 192 KB L1 and 3 MB L2 per core. The Intel design allocates more private cache per core, but the AMD design compensates with a much larger shared L3 pool.

Memory architecture diverges sharply. The AMD processor uses DDR5 with an eight-channel memory bus and 409.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part uses LPDDR5X with a dual-channel bus and 153.6 GB/s. The AMD memory bandwidth advantage is roughly 2.7x, which feeds into the large multi-core deltas seen in memory-sensitive PassMark tests. The AMD part also supports ECC memory, while the Intel part does not.

PCIe connectivity is another major split. The AMD processor provides Gen 5 with 128 lanes from the CPU alone, while the Intel part provides Gen 5 with 4 lanes. This positions the AMD part for multi-GPU and high-speed storage configurations, while the Intel part is constrained to a thin-and-light mobile design. The Intel part integrates Arc B390 graphics, while the AMD part has no integrated graphics at all.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite reveals the clearest picture of multi-core dominance. In R15 multi-core, the AMD part scores 5996 against 3027, a 98.1% lead. R20 multi-core shows 24987 versus 12011, a 108% lead. R23 multi-core is the most lopsided: 59494 versus 18747, a 217.4% advantage. The scaling across Cinebench versions suggests the AMD processor maintains its lead as the workload becomes more demanding.

Single-core Cinebench results are more surprising. R15 single-core shows 846 versus 301.5, a 180.6% lead. R20 single-core shows 3527 versus 1695, a 108.1% lead. R23 single-core shows 8399 versus 2080, a 303.8% lead. The R23 single-core gap is the largest single delta in the entire benchmark set. The Intel part's single-core scores are unusually low relative to its 4.80 GHz boost clock, which suggests the recorded results may reflect a power-constrained mobile environment rather than raw architectural capability.

PassMark integer math shows a 184% lead: 236120 versus 83147. Floating point math shows a 50.4% lead: 156215 versus 103842. The floating point margin is smaller than integer math, indicating the Intel part has relatively stronger FP hardware per thread. Extended instructions show an 180% lead: 76363 versus 27274.

Data encryption shows a 70.4% lead: 44389 versus 26046. Random string sorting shows a 147.3% lead: 99813 versus 40357. Physics simulation shows a 37.6% lead: 4156 versus 3021. Multithreaded PassMark shows a 98.3% lead: 67035 versus 33802. The physics delta is the second-smallest margin in the set after the single-thread tests, suggesting the Intel part handles certain structured workloads more competitively.

The narrowest margins are in PassMark single-threaded tests, where both recorded entries show 4530 versus 4124, a 9.8% delta. The find prime numbers test is the only tie at 337 for both. These two results indicate that in lightly threaded scalar workloads, the Intel mobile part is not far behind the desktop AMD part.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every specification field. The AMD part has a base clock of 4.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, while the Intel part has a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The AMD part has a TDP of 350 W, while the Intel part has a TDP of 25 W. That 14x TDP difference explains the performance gap and positions these parts in completely different power envelopes.

The AMD processor uses 16,630 million transistors across a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². The Intel processor has no recorded transistor count or die size in the database. The AMD part has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel part is locked. The AMD part has a launch MSRP of $1649 and was released on 2025-07-22. The Intel part has no recorded launch MSRP and was released on 2026-01-04.

Memory support differs: the AMD part uses DDR5 with eight channels, the Intel part uses LPDDR5X with two channels. ECC memory is supported on the AMD part but not on the Intel part. PCIe lanes differ from 128 on the AMD part to 4 on the Intel part. Integrated graphics are absent on the AMD part and present as Arc B390 on the Intel part. The market segments differ: Desktop for AMD, Mobile for Intel.

The Intel part has a higher percentile ranking issue: it sits at the 87th percentile of all CPUs, while the AMD part sits at the 97th percentile. The average benchmark score is 101041 for AMD and 40967 for Intel. The AMD part's nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 7513 at -1.2%, the AMD EPYC 4585PX at 1.7%, the AMD EPYC 8324P at -2.2%, and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX at 2.6%. The Intel part's nearest rivals are all mobile parts: the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 at -0.6%, the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H at -0.6%, the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435G at 0.6%, and the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H at -0.7%.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX has 32 threads from 16 cores, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H has 16 threads from 16 cores.

Q: How large is the L3 cache difference?

A: The AMD part has 64 MB of L3 cache, while the Intel part has 18 MB shared. The AMD part also has 64 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 per core, versus 192 KB L1 and 3 MB L2 per core on the Intel part.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H does not.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth for each?

A: The AMD part has 409.6 GB/s over an eight-channel DDR5 bus. The Intel part has 153.6 GB/s over a dual-channel LPDDR5X bus.

Q: Does the Intel part have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H includes Arc B390 integrated graphics. The AMD part has no integrated graphics.

Q: What are the power envelopes?

A: The AMD part has a TDP of 350 W, while the Intel part has a TDP of 25 W.

Q: Which processor has a higher percentile ranking?

A: The AMD part ranks at the 97th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel part ranks at the 87th percentile.

The Verdict

The data directs different users to different processors with no ambiguity. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX is the choice for any workload that scales with threads, cache, or memory bandwidth. Its 32 threads, 64 MB L3 cache, 409.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, and 128 PCIe lanes position it for multi-core rendering, data compression, encryption, and heavy computation. The recorded deltas of 217.4% in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 184% in integer math are decisive.

The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H is a mobile processor with a 25 W TDP, integrated Arc B390 graphics, and just 4 PCIe lanes. Its performance profile is closer to the AMD part only in single-threaded scalar workloads, where the PassMark single-thread gap narrows to 9.8%. The find prime numbers tie at 337 shows that in certain specific math workloads, the Intel part can match the AMD chip. The Intel part also has a smaller memory footprint requirement with LPDDR5X and dual-channel support, which suits a mobile platform.

The database shows no benchmark where the Intel part wins outright. Users who need the AMD part's capabilities will find it in the 97th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 101041. Users who need a low-power mobile processor with integrated graphics will find the Intel part at the 87th percentile with an average score of 40967. The choice is not about which is better in absolute terms, but which fits the intended platform and power budget. The AMD part demands a desktop sTR5 socket and 350 W TDP; the Intel part fits a BGA 2540 mobile socket at 25 W. Both processors are active production parts, but they serve different segments of the market with no meaningful overlap in the recorded data.