AMD Ryzen 5 130 vs Intel Core Ultra X7 358H Comparison

The Verdict

The database comparison places the AMD Ryzen 5 130 and Intel Core Ultra X7 358H in very different performance classes. The Intel part holds a commanding lead in every recorded benchmark category, supported by its 87th percentile ranking among all CPUs versus the AMD part's 50th percentile. The Ryzen 5 130 has no benchmark entries in the database, while the Core Ultra X7 358H has an extensive set of recorded scores across Cinebench and Passmark tests. The data shows the Intel processor is the clear choice for any workload where multi-threaded performance, single-thread speed, or specialized instruction throughput matters. The AMD processor is a 6-core, 12-thread Zen 3+ part with a 28 W TDP, suited for basic mobile productivity. The Intel part is a 16-core, 16-thread Panther Lake-H processor with a 25 W TDP, indicating a design focused on high throughput across many cores. Users requiring maximum compute density per watt should select the Intel part based on its recorded performance. The AMD part's advantage is limited to its dual-channel DDR5 memory support and ECC capability, which are absent or different on the Intel side.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H boosts to 4.80 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen 5 130 boosts to 4.55 GHz.

Q: How many cores does each processor have?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 130 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H has 16 cores and 16 threads, meaning it does not use simultaneous multithreading.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 130 is built on a 6 nm process by TSMC. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H uses a 3 nm process by Intel.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 130 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H does not.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth for each?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 130 has a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s with DDR5 support. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H has a memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s with LPDDR5X support.

Q: Does the Intel part have a higher average benchmark score?

A: Yes, the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H has an average benchmark score of 40,967, ranking in the 87th percentile. The AMD Ryzen 5 130 has an average benchmark score of 0 with no recorded entries.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use fundamentally different architectures. The AMD Ryzen 5 130 is based on Zen 3+ under the Rembrandt-R codename, built on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It uses a monolithic die design with a die size of 210 mm². The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H uses Panther Lake architecture under the Panther Lake-H codename, built on a 3 nm process at Intel. The Intel part has no recorded die size in the database.

The cache hierarchy differs substantially. The AMD processor has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel processor has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel L2 cache is six times larger per core, which helps with data locality.

The Intel part integrates Arc B390 graphics, while the AMD part uses Radeon 660M graphics. The memory controllers differ, with AMD supporting DDR5 and Intel supporting LPDDR5X. The AMD processor supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the Intel part. The PCIe generations also differ: AMD offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes, while Intel offers Gen 5 with 4 lanes.

The thread configuration is notable. The AMD part has 6 cores and 12 threads, using simultaneous multithreading. The Intel part has 16 cores and 16 threads, with no hyperthreading. This means the Intel part relies on physical cores for all its threads, while the AMD part extracts additional threads from fewer physical cores.

Specification Differences

The core count differs significantly: 6 cores on the AMD part versus 16 cores on the Intel part. Thread counts follow a similar pattern: 12 threads versus 16 threads. The base clock is lower on the Intel part at 1.90 GHz versus 2.90 GHz on the AMD part. The boost clock favors the Intel part at 4.80 GHz versus 4.55 GHz.

TDP values are close: 28 W for the AMD part and 25 W for the Intel part. The AMD processor uses AMD Socket FP7, while the Intel processor uses Intel BGA 2540. The AMD part has a part number of 100-000000992 (FP7r2), and the Intel part has SA4RAQ9ET.

Memory bandwidth doubles on the Intel part: 153.6 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s. The AMD part supports dual-channel DDR5, while the Intel part supports dual-channel LPDDR5X. ECC memory is supported only on the AMD part. PCIe connectivity: AMD provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes, Intel provides Gen 5 with 4 lanes.

The release dates differ: the AMD part released on September 30, 2025, and the Intel part on January 4, 2026. Both parts are active in production and have locked multipliers. Neither part has a recorded launch MSRP in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between these two processors. The AMD Ryzen 5 130 has no benchmark entries at all. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H has 17 recorded benchmark scores across multiple test suites.

The Intel part's Cinebench results show strong multi-core performance. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 3,027 points. Single-core in R15 is 301.5 points. In R20, multi-core reaches 12,011 points and single-core 1,695 points. In R23, multi-core scores 18,747 points and single-core 2,080 points.

Passmark results for the Intel part cover a wide range of workloads. The multi-thread score is 33,802 and single-thread is 4,124. Data compression scores 332,508, data encryption 26,046, and extended instructions 27,274. Find prime numbers scores 337, floating point math 103,842, and integer math 83,147. Physics scores 3,021 and random string sorting 40,357.

Without recorded scores for the AMD part, the database cannot compute delta percentages or wins for either processor. The nearest rivals to the Intel part are all close in average score: AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 at 41,208 (-0.6% delta), Intel Core Ultra 7 356H at 41,215 (-0.6% delta), AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435G at 40,718 (+0.6% delta), and Intel Core Ultra 7 366H at 41,263 (-0.7% delta). These deltas indicate the Intel part sits within 1% of comparable processors in its class.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H wins in every measured performance category according to the database. Its 16 physical cores provide substantial multi-threaded throughput, as shown by the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 18,747. The high boost clock of 4.80 GHz supports strong single-thread performance, evidenced by the Passmark single-thread score of 4,124. The 18 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB per-core L2 cache help data-heavy workloads, reflected in the data compression score of 332,508.

The Intel part's 3 nm process from Intel and 153.6 GB/s memory bandwidth with LPDDR5X support indicate a platform designed for high-bandwidth tasks. The integrated Arc B390 graphics add GPU capability. The 25 W TDP with this level of performance suggests efficient power use per unit of work.

The AMD Ryzen 5 130 has no recorded benchmark wins in the database. Its advantages are structural rather than performance-based. It supports ECC memory, which the Intel part does not. It offers 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes for CPU-attached devices, compared to 4 PCIe Gen 5 lanes on the Intel part, which may suit certain expansion configurations. The 6 nm TSMC process and 210 mm² die size are known quantities. The 6-core, 12-thread configuration with a 2.90 GHz base clock may be sufficient for light mobile workloads where the 28 W TDP and DDR5 support are adequate.

The data indicates the Intel processor is the higher-performing part in all recorded tests. The AMD processor's role is limited to specific use cases where ECC memory or the broader PCIe lane count are required. For general compute, the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H delivers scores that place it in the 87th percentile, while the AMD Ryzen 5 130 sits at the 50th percentile without any benchmark data. The database shows a clear performance hierarchy: the Intel part leads in every measurable workload, and the AMD part offers platform features that may matter for specialized deployments.