AMD Ryzen 5 3501U vs Intel Core Ultra 7 366H Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U and the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H are both active mobile processors, but they occupy very different positions in the performance spectrum. The Ryzen 5 3501U is a 4-core, 4-thread part from the 3000 series, built on a 12 nm process with a 15 W TDP. The Core Ultra 7 366H is a 16-core, 16-thread part from the Core Ultra Series 3, built on a 3 nm process with a 25 W TDP. The recorded benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap between the two, with the Intel part winning all 11 head-to-head comparisons in the database. The Ryzen 5 3501U posts an average benchmark score of 14,320, placing it in the 69th percentile of all CPUs. The Core Ultra 7 366H averages 41,263, placing it in the 87th percentile. The nearest rival data for the Ryzen shows it trading blows with the AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 (average score 14,336, a 0.1% difference), the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C (14,277, 0.3% ahead), the Intel Core 7 160UL (14,232, 0.6% ahead), and the Intel Core i5-10400F (14,185, 1% ahead). The Core Ultra 7 366H sits alongside the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H (41,215, 0.1% ahead), the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 (41,208, 0.1% ahead), the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X (41,376, 0.3% behind), and the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H (40,967, 0.7% ahead).

Where Each One Wins

The head-to-head benchmark table in the database shows a clean sweep for the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H, with 11 wins and zero for the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U. This is not a close contest. The largest deltas appear in compute-heavy workloads. In the PassMark find prime numbers test, the Intel part scores 326 versus 21 for the Ryzen, a 93.6% advantage. Extended instructions show a similar pattern: 26,901 versus 3,274, a 87.8% gap. Floating point math gives the Intel part 103,615 against 12,707, an 87.7% lead. These are workloads that scale directly with core count, thread count, and instruction throughput, and the 16-core Intel part has a structural advantage.

The Ryzen 5 3501U does not win a single recorded test, so there is no use-case where the data supports recommending it on raw performance. However, its position in the percentile rankings and its nearest rival scores suggest it competes in a different class. The Ryzen is within 1% of the Intel Core i5-10400F and within 0.6% of the Intel Core 7 160UL. For a 15 W part, that places it in the range of older desktop-class and low-power mobile chips. The Core Ultra 7 366H, by contrast, sits near the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X, a high-end desktop part from a previous generation, with only a 0.3% difference in average score. The data suggests the Ryzen 5 3501U is aimed at everyday mobile tasks where its lower TDP and integrated graphics are the primary considerations, while the Core Ultra 7 366H is positioned for multi-threaded productivity and content creation workloads.

In single-thread performance, the gap narrows but remains substantial. The Intel part scores 4,043 in the PassMark single-thread test, while the Ryzen scores 2,136, a 47.2% difference. Even in a workload that does not fully utilize all cores, the Intel architecture delivers nearly double the throughput. The multithread test shows a 78.8% gap, with scores of 33,429 and 7,071 respectively. The Intel part also leads in data compression (327,455 versus 87,380, a 73.3% difference), data encryption (25,845 versus 5,580, a 78.4% difference), random string sorting (39,814 versus 10,414, a 73.8% difference), integer math (83,695 versus 26,321, a 68.6% difference), and physics (2,880 versus 483, an 83.2% difference). Each of these tests reflects a different aspect of CPU throughput, and the Intel part wins every one.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different manufacturing and design eras. The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U is built on a 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with a die size of 210 mm² and 4,940 million transistors. Its architecture is Zen+ (Picasso), a design that dates back to AMD's 3000 series mobile lineup. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H is built on a 3 nm process at Intel, with the Panther Lake architecture. The database lists no die size or transistor count for the Intel part, but the process node difference alone indicates a major generational leap. A 12 nm process versus a 3 nm process typically allows for significantly higher transistor density and lower power per operation, though the Intel part has a higher TDP of 25 W compared to 15 W for the AMD.

Core and cache configurations differ sharply. The Ryzen 5 3501U has 4 cores and 4 threads, with no simultaneous multithreading. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The cache hierarchy reflects this scale. The AMD part has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of shared L3. The Intel part has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The larger per-core caches and the much larger shared L3 give the Intel part a substantial advantage in workloads that reuse data, such as compression and sorting. The L3 cache alone is 4.5 times larger on the Intel part.

Memory support also diverges. The Ryzen 5 3501U supports DDR4 memory on a dual-channel bus, with a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X on a dual-channel bus, with a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. That is a 3x difference in theoretical bandwidth, which directly impacts memory-bound workloads like encryption and integer math. The Intel part also supports PCIe Gen 5 with 12 lanes (CPU only), while the AMD part is limited to PCIe Gen 3. The integrated graphics differ as well: the AMD part uses Radeon Vega 8, while the Intel part uses Intel Xe3 Graphics. The database does not include graphics benchmarks for either part, so the comparison is limited to the CPU scores.

The boost clocks tell a similar story. The Ryzen 5 3501U has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 3.70 GHz. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. Despite a lower base clock, the Intel part boosts nearly 1.1 GHz higher, which explains part of the single-thread advantage. The memory bus width is dual-channel for both, but the memory generation and bandwidth differences are decisive. Neither part supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The Ryzen uses AMD Socket FP5, while the Intel uses Intel BGA 2540.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H outperforms the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U in every recorded test. The smallest margin is in single-thread performance, where the Intel part leads by 47.2%. The largest margin is in find prime numbers, where the Intel part leads by 93.6%. The average benchmark score for the Intel part is 41,263, which is 2.88 times the Ryzen's 14,320. The percentile rankings reinforce this: the Intel part sits at the 87th percentile of all CPUs, while the Ryzen sits at the 69th percentile.

The data indicates that the Core Ultra 7 366H is the choice for any workload that benefits from high core counts, large caches, or high memory bandwidth. Its 16 cores and 16 threads, 18 MB of L3 cache, and 115.2 GB/s memory bandwidth make it suitable for multi-threaded rendering, compilation, and data analysis. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X, a desktop processor, which shows that its performance level is comparable to high-end desktop parts from a prior generation. The Ryzen 5 3501U, with its 4 cores and 4 threads, 4 MB of L3 cache, and 38.4 GB/s memory bandwidth, is positioned for lighter tasks. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-10400F, a desktop chip, and the Intel Core 7 160UL, a low-power mobile part. For users whose workloads are single-threaded and light, the Ryzen's lower TDP of 15 W may be a consideration, but the data does not show any performance category where it leads.

The release dates in the database show the Core Ultra 7 366H launched on 2026-01-04, while the Ryzen 5 3501U launched on 2026-05-31. The Intel part was available earlier. Neither part has a launch MSRP listed in the database, so no price comparison is possible from the recorded data. The production status for both is listed as Active.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U has 4 cores and 4 threads.

Q: What is the difference in average benchmark scores?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U has an average benchmark score of 14,320. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H has an average benchmark score of 41,263. The Intel part scores approximately 2.88 times higher.

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

A: In the PassMark single-thread test, the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H scores 4,043, while the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U scores 2,136. The Intel part leads by 47.2%.

Q: What memory technologies do the two processors support?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U supports DDR4 on a dual-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X on a dual-channel bus with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the process nodes for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U is built on a 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H is built on a 3 nm process at Intel.

Q: Which processor wins in the head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H wins all 11 head-to-head benchmark comparisons recorded in the database. The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U wins none.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest victory for the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H comes in the PassMark find prime numbers test. The Intel part scores 326, while the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U scores 21. The delta is 93.6%, meaning the Intel part is roughly 15.5 times faster in this specific workload. This test is highly sensitive to integer instruction throughput and core scaling, and the 16-core Intel part dominates the 4-core AMD part.

Extended instructions show a similar pattern. The Intel part scores 26,901 versus 3,274 for the AMD part, a 87.8% difference. Floating point math gives the Intel part 103,615 against 12,707, an 87.7% gap. Physics simulation shows an 83.2% difference, with scores of 2,880 and 483. These are all multi-threaded workloads where the core count and clock speed advantages of the Intel part translate directly into large performance margins.

The multithread benchmark, which is a general measure of parallel performance, shows the Intel part at 33,429 and the AMD part at 7,071, a 78.8% difference. Data encryption shows 25,845 versus 5,580, a 78.4% gap. Random string sorting shows 39,814 versus 10,414, a 73.8% difference. Data compression shows 327,455 versus 87,380, a 73.3% gap. Integer math shows 83,695 versus 26,321, a 68.6% difference. Each of these tests reflects a different aspect of CPU capability, and the Intel part leads in all of them.

The narrowest margin is in the PassMark single-thread test, where the Intel part scores 4,043 and the AMD part scores 2,136, a 47.2% difference. This is still a large gap, but it is the closest the AMD part comes to the Intel part in any recorded benchmark. The single-thread score is listed twice in the database (as passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread), and both entries show identical values of 2,136 for the AMD part and 4,043 for the Intel part. The delta is 47.2% in both cases.

The average benchmark scores place the two parts in different competitive tiers. The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U averages 14,320, with nearest rivals including the AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 (14,336, a 0.1% difference), the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C (14,277, 0.3% ahead), the Intel Core 7 160UL (14,232, 0.6% ahead), and the Intel Core i5-10400F (14,185, 1% ahead). The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H averages 41,263, with nearest rivals including the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H (41,215, 0.1% ahead), the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 (41,208, 0.1% ahead), the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X (41,376, 0.3% behind), and the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H (40,967, 0.7% ahead). The data confirms that the Intel part competes against high-end desktop processors, while the AMD part competes against lower-tier mobile and embedded chips.

The cache and memory differences explain much of the performance gap. The Intel part has 18 MB of shared L3 cache, compared to 4 MB on the AMD part. The Intel part has 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, compared to 512 KB on the AMD part. The Intel part has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, compared to 96 KB on the AMD part. Memory bandwidth is 115.2 GB/s on the Intel part versus 38.4 GB/s on the AMD part. These structural differences are consistent with the benchmark results, which show the Intel part leading in every test that involves data movement or repeated access to cached data.

The TDP values also differ, with the Intel part rated at 25 W and the AMD part at 15 W. This indicates that the Intel part is designed for higher sustained performance at the cost of more power draw, while the AMD part is optimized for lower power consumption. The database does not include any power efficiency metrics, so the analysis cannot quantify the trade-off beyond the TDP figures. Both parts are listed as Active in production status, and both have a release date in 2026, with the Intel part launching on 2026-01-04 and the AMD part on 2026-05-31.