AMD Ryzen 7 250 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225F Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data presents a clear but lopsided split. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F wins 14 of the 15 recorded head-to-head tests, while the AMD Ryzen 7 250 manages a single victory. That one win, however, is not trivial: it comes in PassMark integer math, where the AMD part scores 91,565 against the Intel part's 66,417, a 37.9% advantage for the Ryzen. This indicates that the AMD chip has a distinct edge in workloads that rely heavily on integer arithmetic, which can matter for certain types of computation, though it is not a dominant overall position.

For nearly everything else, the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F takes the lead. The largest deltas appear in PassMark find prime numbers (79.3% ahead), PassMark physics (52.8% ahead), and PassMark floating point math (42.4% ahead). These are substantial margins, suggesting the Intel processor is much stronger in floating-point-heavy tasks and in single-threaded workloads that require rapid repeated calculations. The Intel part also leads in multithreaded workloads, with a 19.1% edge in PassMark multithread and a 13.5% edge in Cinebench R15 multicore. The use-case split is therefore straightforward: the Ryzen 7 250 is the choice for integer-math-focused tasks, while the Core Ultra 5 225F is the stronger performer in essentially every other measured category, including rendering, encryption, compression, and general single-thread performance.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 is built on Zen 4 architecture with the Hawk Point codename, using a 4 nm process from TSMC. It packs 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. Its cache layout includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F, by contrast, uses Arrow Lake architecture with the Arrow Lake-S codename, fabricated on a 3 nm process, also from TSMC. It has 10 cores but only 10 threads, meaning no hyperthreading, with the same 3.30 GHz base clock but a lower 4.90 GHz boost clock. The Intel chip carries 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3.

The transistor counts differ notably: the AMD chip has 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, while the Intel chip has 17,800 million transistors on a larger 243 mm² die. Both support DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, but the Intel part has a higher memory bandwidth at 102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s for the AMD part. Neither supports ECC memory. The AMD processor uses PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes, while the Intel processor uses PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes. The AMD chip includes integrated graphics in the form of the Radeon 780M, whereas the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F has no integrated graphics at all. The AMD part is a mobile-market chip on AMD Socket FP8 with a 28 W TDP, while the Intel part is a desktop chip on Intel Socket 1851 with a 65 W TDP. The AMD chip was released on January 5, 2025; the Intel chip followed a day later on January 6, 2025. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $231. The AMD part is not overclockable, and neither is the Intel part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Walking through the recorded measurements, the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F establishes its lead early in the Cinebench suite. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Intel part scores 2,660 versus 2,302, a 13.5% advantage. In Cinebench R15 singlecore, it scores 287 versus 269, a 6.3% advantage. The R23 results follow the same pattern: Intel leads multicore with 16,467 against 14,676, a 10.9% edge, and singlecore with 1,893 against 1,715, a 9.4% edge. These results indicate that the Intel chip is faster in both single-threaded and multi-threaded rendering workloads, though the multicore margin is not as large as some of the PassMark gaps.

The PassMark suite reveals where the Intel processor truly runs away. In floating point math, the Intel part scores 92,554 against 53,285, a 42.4% lead. In physics, it scores 2,430 against 1,147, a 52.8% lead. In find prime numbers, the gap is enormous: 352 versus 73, a 79.3% advantage for Intel. Data encryption also favors Intel heavily, with 22,648 versus 17,661, a 22% lead. Extended instructions go to Intel by 22.9%, with scores of 28,027 versus 21,613. Multithreaded performance in PassMark shows Intel ahead by 19.1%, at 31,004 versus 25,089. Single-thread performance in PassMark shows Intel ahead by 16.4%, at 4,397 versus 3,678.

The margins are smaller in some areas. Data compression favors Intel by just 3.3%, with 310,843 versus 300,708. Random string sorting favors Intel by 3.9%, with 37,325 versus 35,861. These are modest advantages, indicating that in these specific tasks the two processors are much closer. The lone AMD win in integer math is the outlier, with the Ryzen 7 250 scoring 91,565 against the Intel part's 66,417, a 37.9% margin in the opposite direction. That single result does not change the overall picture, but it does show that the AMD architecture retains a specific strength.

The average benchmark scores place the two chips close in overall standing. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 has an average benchmark score of 38,221 and sits at the 86th percentile among all CPUs. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F has an average benchmark score of 37,313 and sits at the 85th percentile. The nearest rivals for the AMD chip include the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T with an average score of 38,194 and a 0.1% delta, the Intel Core i5-13600HX with 38,261 and a -0.1% delta, the Intel Core i5-14490F with 38,149 and a 0.2% delta, and the Intel Core Ultra 9 285H with 38,312 and a -0.2% delta. For the Intel chip, the nearest rivals are the Intel Core i9-13900HK with 37,425 and a -0.3% delta, the AMD Ryzen 7 7735H with 37,161 and a 0.4% delta, the Intel Core i7-13700 with 37,135 and a 0.5% delta, and the AMD Ryzen 7 160 with 37,117 and a 0.5% delta. The percentile rankings are nearly identical, and the average scores are within about 2.4% of each other, despite the lopsided head-to-head win count. This suggests that the two chips are in the same performance class overall, but the Intel part has a more consistent set of strengths across the measured tests.

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F as the stronger processor for the majority of workloads. Its wins in Cinebench R15 and R23, both single-core and multi-core, make it the better choice for rendering and CPU-bound creative tasks. Its large advantages in PassMark physics, floating point math, and find prime numbers indicate superior performance in scientific and simulation workloads that rely on floating-point calculations. Its 19.1% lead in PassMark multithread and 16.4% lead in single-thread performance reinforce that it is simply faster in most general-purpose computing scenarios. The Intel part also offers a higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s and PCIe Gen 5 support, which may matter for platform-level considerations.

The AMD Ryzen 7 250 is the pick only for a narrow set of integer-math-heavy tasks, where its 37.9% advantage in PassMark integer math makes it clearly superior. It also has integrated graphics via the Radeon 780M, which the Intel part lacks entirely, so systems built around the AMD chip do not require a discrete GPU for basic display output. The AMD chip also draws far less power at 28 W versus 65 W, which is relevant for mobile or low-power builds. For anyone choosing between the two strictly on benchmark performance, the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F wins the vast majority of comparisons. For anyone with a specific integer-math workload or a need for integrated graphics and lower power consumption, the AMD Ryzen 7 250 has a legitimate case.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmarks in the database?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F wins 14 of the 15 recorded head-to-head tests. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 wins only 1, in PassMark integer math.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F leads by 79.3%, scoring 352 versus 73.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen 7 250 have any clear advantage?

A: Yes, it leads in PassMark integer math with a score of 91,565 versus 66,417, a 37.9% advantage. It also has integrated graphics (Radeon 780M) and a much lower TDP of 28 W versus 65 W.

Q: How do the two compare in single-threaded performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F is ahead in both Cinebench R15 singlecore (287 versus 269, a 6.3% lead) and Cinebench R23 singlecore (1,893 versus 1,715, a 9.4% lead). In PassMark single thread, Intel leads 4,397 versus 3,678, a 16.4% margin.

Q: What are the overall percentile rankings?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 250 sits at the 86th percentile among all CPUs, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F sits at the 85th percentile. Their average benchmark scores are 38,221 and 37,313, respectively.

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F have integrated graphics?

A: No, its integrated graphics field is listed as N/A. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 includes a Radeon 780M iGPU.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several core specifications. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F has 10 cores and 10 threads. The AMD chip boosts to 5.10 GHz, while the Intel chip boosts to 4.90 GHz; both have a 3.30 GHz base clock. The TDP is 28 W for the AMD chip and 65 W for the Intel chip. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP8, while the Intel part uses Intel Socket 1851. The AMD architecture is Zen 4 with the Hawk Point codename, while the Intel architecture is Arrow Lake with the Arrow Lake-S codename. The process nodes differ: 4 nm for AMD and 3 nm for Intel, both from TSMC. Transistor counts are 25,000 million for AMD and 17,800 million for Intel, with die sizes of 178 mm² and 243 mm², respectively. Cache configurations differ: AMD has 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3, while Intel has 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 20 MB shared L3. Memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s for AMD and 102.4 GB/s for Intel. PCIe support differs: Gen 4 with 20 lanes for AMD, Gen 5 with 20 lanes for Intel. The AMD chip has Radeon 780M integrated graphics; the Intel chip has none. The market segments differ: AMD is mobile, Intel is desktop. The AMD chip was released on January 5, 2025, and the Intel chip on January 6, 2025. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $231; the AMD part has no listed launch MSRP.