AMD Ryzen 5 5600F vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap between the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus. Across all 11 shared benchmark tests, the Intel processor takes the win, with no test favoring the AMD part. The largest margin appears in floating point math, where the Intel chip scores 159824 against 34548 for the AMD, a 78.4% difference. That workload measures raw FP throughput, and the Intel processor’s lead is substantial.

Data compression also shows a wide gulf. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 553155, while the Ryzen 5 5600F manages 232836, a 57.9% deficit for the AMD part. Integer math is closer in relative terms but still lopsided: Intel scores 123030 versus 59339, a 51.8% gap. Prime number finding, a test sensitive to core count and clock speed, favors Intel by 73.5% (452 versus 120).

Multithreaded performance follows the same pattern. The Intel part scores 50146 in the passmark multithread test, against 19236 for the AMD, a 61.6% difference. Physics simulation, which often scales with thread count, shows Intel at 3183 versus 1043, a 67.2% gap. Random string sorting, a memory-latency and cache-sensitive workload, gives Intel 67209 against 23422, a 65.2% lead.

Single-thread performance is the closest contest, but Intel still wins by a clear margin. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 4698 in the single-thread test, versus 2872 for the Ryzen 5 5600F, a 38.9% advantage. Extended instructions, which measures SIMD and specialized instruction throughput, shows Intel at 42880 against 16266, a 62.1% difference. Data encryption follows with Intel at 41292 versus 13839, a 66.5% gap.

The overall average benchmark score reinforces the hierarchy. The Intel processor averages 66159 across all recorded tests, while the AMD part averages 36945. That places the Intel chip in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs in the database, compared to the 85th percentile for the Ryzen 5 5600F. The nearest rival data for the AMD part lists the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 at 36938 (0% delta), the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D at 37018 (-0.2%), and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 at 37093 (-0.4%). The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus, by contrast, sits near the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D, which scores 65914 (0.4% delta), and the Intel Core 9 273PQE at 66099 (0.1%).

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-thread score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 4698 in the passmark single-thread test, while the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F scores 2872. That gives Intel a 38.9% advantage in single-thread performance.

Q: How do the two compare in multithreaded workloads?

A: The Intel part scores 50146 in the passmark multithread test, versus 19236 for the AMD part, a 61.6% gap. The Intel processor also leads in physics simulation (3183 versus 1043) and prime number finding (452 versus 120).

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has an average benchmark score of 66159, while the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F averages 36945. The Intel chip ranks in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, and the AMD chip ranks in the 85th percentile.

Q: Does the AMD processor win any shared benchmark tests?

A: No. Across all 11 head-to-head benchmark tests, the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus wins every single one. The AMD Ryzen 5 5600F records zero wins in the comparison.

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

A: The closest margin is in integer math, where Intel leads by 51.8% (123030 versus 59339). Single-thread performance is the next closest at 38.9% (4698 versus 2872).

Q: How does the Intel processor compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 66159 on average. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core 9 273PQE, scores 66099 (0.1% delta). The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D scores 65914 (0.4% delta), and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 66855 (-1% delta).

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design generations. The AMD Ryzen 5 5600F uses the Zen 3 architecture, codenamed Vermeer, built on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It integrates 4,150 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus uses the Arrow Lake Refresh codename, part of the Core Ultra Series 2, built on a 3 nm process also at TSMC. That die contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² area.

Core configuration differs sharply. The AMD part has 6 cores and 12 threads, indicating simultaneous multithreading. The Intel part has 18 cores and 18 threads, meaning no hyperthreading on any core. Thread counts alone do not tell the full story: Intel’s 18 physical cores provide more parallel execution units, while AMD’s 12 threads rely on dual-issue per core.

Cache hierarchy also diverges. The AMD Ryzen 5 5600F has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3. The Intel part’s larger per-core L2 (3 MB versus 512 KB) likely explains part of its advantage in cache-sensitive workloads like random string sorting, where it leads by 65.2%.

Memory architecture differs as well. The AMD part supports DDR4 memory with dual-channel access and a recorded memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. The Intel part supports DDR5 memory, also dual-channel, but with a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, more than double the AMD figure. Both support ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity also moves forward. The AMD Ryzen 5 5600F provides PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. Neither processor includes integrated graphics, as both list N/A for that field.

The Intel processor has a higher base clock (4.20 GHz versus 3.00 GHz) and a higher boost clock (5.30 GHz versus 4.00 GHz). Both have unlocked multipliers, meaning overclocking is possible on each. The Intel part’s process node advantage (3 nm versus 7 nm) and transistor count (17,800 million versus 4,150 million) point to a much larger and more complex die.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field recorded. Core count: 6 for AMD, 18 for Intel. Thread count: 12 for AMD, 18 for Intel. Base clock: 3.00 GHz for AMD, 4.20 GHz for Intel. Boost clock: 4.00 GHz for AMD, 5.30 GHz for Intel. TDP: 65 watts for AMD, 125 watts for Intel.

Socket and platform: AMD uses Socket AM4, while Intel uses Socket 1851. The AMD part belongs to the 5000 series, while the Intel part belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2. Codename differences: Vermeer for AMD, Arrow Lake Refresh for Intel. Process node: 7 nm for AMD, 3 nm for Intel, both at TSMC.

Memory support: DDR4 for AMD, DDR5 for Intel. Memory bandwidth: 51.2 GB/s for AMD, 115.2 GB/s for Intel. PCIe generation: Gen 4 for AMD, Gen 5 for Intel. L1 cache per core: 64 KB for AMD, 192 KB for Intel. L2 cache per core: 512 KB for AMD, 3 MB for Intel. L3 cache: 32 MB shared for AMD, 30 MB shared for Intel.

Transistor count and die size also differ: 4,150 million transistors on 74 mm² for AMD, versus 17,800 million on 243 mm² for Intel. The release dates are recorded as September 15, 2025 for the AMD part and March 10, 2026 for the Intel part. The Intel processor has a launch MSRP of $184; the AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP.

Both are desktop parts, both are active in production, and both have unlocked multipliers. Both support ECC memory. Neither has integrated graphics. Both have 20 PCIe lanes from the CPU.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear hierarchy. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus outperforms the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F in every recorded benchmark. The Intel part’s average score of 66159 is 79% higher than the AMD part’s 36945. In percentile terms, Intel sits at 93 versus AMD at 85, meaning the Intel chip ranks higher among all CPUs in the database.

The closest comparison for the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F is not the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus but rather the Intel Core Ultra 5 225, which scores 36938 (0% delta). The AMD part’s nearest rivals are all within 0.5% of its average score, including the AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D at 37018 (-0.2%) and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 at 37093 (-0.4%). The Intel processor, by contrast, competes with much higher-scoring parts like the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D (65914) and the Intel Core 9 273PQE (66099).

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus also shows a clear advantage in memory bandwidth (115.2 GB/s versus 51.2 GB/s), which aligns with its DDR5 support and likely contributes to its lead in data-heavy workloads. The AMD part’s lower TDP (65 watts versus 125 watts) and older socket (AM4) suggest a more power-efficient, legacy-platform option, but the benchmark data does not show any performance area where that trade-off pays off.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus wins in every measured category. For users focused on multithreaded throughput, the Intel part delivers 50146 in the multithread test versus 19236, a 61.6% margin. For floating point math, the gap reaches 78.4% (159824 versus 34548). For data compression, Intel leads by 57.9% (553155 versus 232836). For integer math, Intel leads by 51.8% (123030 versus 59339). For encryption, Intel leads by 66.5% (41292 versus 13839).

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600F does not win any shared benchmark. Its only relative strength is that the single-thread gap (38.9%) is the smallest of any test, meaning the AMD part is less far behind in lightly threaded workloads. However, it still loses that test outright. The AMD part’s 65-watt TDP and AM4 socket compatibility may appeal to users with existing DDR4 motherboards, but the performance data does not support any claim of a benchmark win.

For users prioritizing raw performance across compression, encryption, math, physics, and sorting, the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is the only choice based on recorded data. The AMD Ryzen 5 5600F remains competitive within its own tier, sitting near the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 and AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D, but it does not approach the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus in any measured workload.