AMD Ryzen 5 130 vs Intel Core Ultra X7 368H Comparison

AMD Ryzen 5 130 and Intel Core Ultra X7 368H are two mobile processors with fundamentally different design philosophies. The Ryzen 5 130 is a 6-core, 12-thread part built on a mature 6 nm process, while the Core Ultra X7 368H is a 16-core, 16-thread processor using Intel’s 3 nm node. The database records a benchmark score for the Intel part but no comparable scores for the AMD part, so the analysis below is based on the architectural and specification data available for both, along with the Intel processor’s measured performance profile.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H holds the measured performance advantage in every recorded benchmark category, given that it is the only one of the two with benchmark scores in the database. Its 16 cores and 16 threads provide a substantial parallel workload capacity, which shows in multi-threaded tests. The recorded Cinebench R23 multicore score of 28221 places it well above typical mobile processors, and its PassMark multithread score of 32956 confirms strong throughput for rendering, compilation, and other heavily threaded tasks.

The AMD Ryzen 5 130, while lacking recorded benchmark scores, has architectural traits that suggest a different area of strength. Its 6 cores and 12 threads with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and boost clock of 4.55 GHz point to a design focused on efficiency and adequate single-thread response rather than raw core count. The 28 W TDP, compared to the Intel part’s 25 W, indicates a modest power envelope, but the AMD processor’s Zen 3+ architecture is a proven design for laptops prioritizing battery life over peak performance.

The Intel part wins on memory bandwidth. Its LPDDR5X support with a dual-channel bus delivers 153.6 GB/s, exactly double the 76.8 GB/s of the AMD processor’s DDR5 memory bus. This bandwidth advantage matters for integrated graphics performance and memory-intensive workloads. The Intel processor also uses PCIe Gen 5 with 4 lanes, while the AMD processor uses PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes, so the Intel part has a newer interconnect standard but fewer lanes.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different foundries and process nodes. The AMD Ryzen 5 130 uses TSMC’s 6 nm process with a die size of 210 mm², while the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H uses Intel’s 3 nm process. The Intel part has no recorded die size, but the smaller process node allows for a significantly higher core count in a similar power envelope.

Core configuration is the most striking difference. The AMD processor has 6 cores and 12 threads, meaning it supports simultaneous multithreading. The Intel processor has 16 cores and 16 threads, with no multithreading on any core. This means the Intel part relies entirely on physical cores for its thread count, while the AMD part uses two threads per core to reach 12 threads.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The AMD processor has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel processor has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. Per-core cache capacity is much higher on the Intel part, which can reduce memory latency for frequently accessed data.

Memory support differs. The AMD processor supports DDR5 memory, while the Intel processor supports LPDDR5X. Both use a dual-channel memory bus. The AMD processor supports ECC memory, while the Intel processor does not. Memory bandwidth is a major differentiator: the Intel part’s 153.6 GB/s is double the AMD part’s 76.8 GB/s.

Integrated graphics are another key difference. The AMD processor uses a Radeon 660M, while the Intel processor uses an Arc B390. The Intel part’s higher memory bandwidth likely benefits its integrated GPU more, as iGPUs rely heavily on system memory for frame buffer and textures.

The socket and platform differ completely. The AMD processor uses AMD Socket FP7 and the part number 100-000000992 (FP7r2), while the Intel processor uses Intel BGA 2540 and part number SA4R7Q9EJ. Both are mobile parts with a production status of Active.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The AMD Ryzen 5 130 has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What is the boost clock of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 130 boosts to 4.55 GHz. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H boosts to 5.00 GHz.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 130 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H does not.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 130 has a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s with DDR5. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has a memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s with LPDDR5X.

Q: What is the Intel processor’s recorded Cinebench R23 multicore score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H scores 28221 in Cinebench R23 multicore.

Q: Which processor has a higher TDP?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 130 has a TDP of 28 W. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has a TDP of 25 W.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two processors:

• Cores: AMD Ryzen 5 130 has 6 cores; Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has 16 cores.
• Threads: AMD Ryzen 5 130 has 12 threads; Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has 16 threads.
• Base clock: AMD Ryzen 5 130 runs at 2.90 GHz; Intel Core Ultra X7 368H runs at 2.00 GHz.
• Boost clock: AMD Ryzen 5 130 boosts to 4.55 GHz; Intel Core Ultra X7 368H boosts to 5.00 GHz.
• TDP: AMD Ryzen 5 130 is rated at 28 W; Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is rated at 25 W.
• Socket: AMD Ryzen 5 130 uses AMD Socket FP7; Intel Core Ultra X7 368H uses Intel BGA 2540.
• Architecture: AMD Ryzen 5 130 uses Zen 3+; Intel Core Ultra X7 368H uses Panther Lake.
• Process node: AMD Ryzen 5 130 uses 6 nm from TSMC; Intel Core Ultra X7 368H uses 3 nm from Intel.
• Die size: AMD Ryzen 5 130 has a die size of 210 mm²; Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has no recorded die size.
• L1 cache: AMD Ryzen 5 130 has 64 KB per core; Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has 192 KB per core.
• L2 cache: AMD Ryzen 5 130 has 512 KB per core; Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has 2.5 MB per core.
• L3 cache: AMD Ryzen 5 130 has 16 MB shared; Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has 18 MB shared.
• Memory support: AMD Ryzen 5 130 uses DDR5; Intel Core Ultra X7 368H uses LPDDR5X.
• Memory bandwidth: AMD Ryzen 5 130 has 76.8 GB/s; Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has 153.6 GB/s.
• ECC memory: AMD Ryzen 5 130 supports ECC; Intel Core Ultra X7 368H does not.
• PCIe: AMD Ryzen 5 130 uses Gen 4 with 20 lanes; Intel Core Ultra X7 368H uses Gen 5 with 4 lanes.
• Integrated graphics: AMD Ryzen 5 130 has Radeon 660M; Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has Arc B390.
• Release date: AMD Ryzen 5 130 was released on 2025-09-30; Intel Core Ultra X7 368H was released on 2026-01-04.
• Part number: AMD Ryzen 5 130 is 100-000000992 (FP7r2); Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is SA4R7Q9EJ.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains benchmark scores only for the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H. The AMD Ryzen 5 130 has no recorded scores, so direct numerical comparison is impossible. The Intel part’s measured scores, however, can be interpreted against its nearest rivals to give context for its performance tier.

The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has an average benchmark score of 40518 and sits at the 87th percentile of all CPUs in the database. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core 7 253PE, scores 40557, which is 0.1% higher. The Intel Core 5 223PE scores 40585, 0.2% higher. The AMD Ryzen 9 7940H scores 40431, 0.2% lower. The Intel Xeon 6507P scores 40426, also 0.2% lower. These deltas are tiny, meaning the Core Ultra X7 368H sits in a very tight performance cluster around the 40500 average score mark.

Single-thread performance is strong. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3984 and PassMark single-thread score of 4005 indicate a high per-core efficiency, consistent with the 5.00 GHz boost clock. The Cinebench R15 single-core score of 401 and R20 single-core score of 1673 follow the same pattern.

Multi-threaded scores show the benefit of 16 physical cores. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 28221 is roughly 7 times the single-core score, indicating good scaling across the core count. The Cinebench R20 multicore score of 11852 and R15 multicore score of 2844 reinforce this. PassMark multithread score of 32956 aligns with the Cinebench results.

Math and encryption workloads show specific strengths. PassMark integer math scores 88083, floating point math scores 105681, and extended instructions score 25669. Data compression scores 312927, while data encryption scores 25228. Find prime numbers scores 321, and random string sorting scores 38093. Physics score is 2857.

The nearest rival deltas are all within 0.2%, so the Core Ultra X7 368H is effectively tied with the Intel Core 7 253PE, Intel Core 5 223PE, AMD Ryzen 9 7940H, and Intel Xeon 6507P in overall average score. The 87th percentile ranking places it well above the median CPU, but the tight clustering of rivals means the Intel part does not clearly outclass its immediate competition.

The Verdict

The data clearly separates these two processors by design intent. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is a high-core-count processor with 16 physical cores, a 5.00 GHz boost clock, 153.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth, and a recorded average benchmark score of 40518 at the 87th percentile. It is the only one of the two with measured performance data, and every recorded score favors it. For workloads that use many threads, such as rendering, video encoding, or scientific computing, the Intel part’s 16 cores provide a large advantage over the AMD part’s 6 cores.

The AMD Ryzen 5 130 has no recorded benchmark scores, so its performance cannot be directly quantified from the database. What the specification data shows is a lower-power, lower-core-count design with a higher base clock of 2.90 GHz, ECC memory support, and a 6 nm process. Its 28 W TDP is only 3 W higher than the Intel part, despite having 10 fewer cores, which suggests the AMD processor is not necessarily more power-efficient per core. The AMD part’s 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes offer more connectivity options than the Intel part’s 4 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, which may matter for systems with multiple NVMe drives or other expansion devices.

The Intel processor is the choice for raw performance, based on the recorded data. Its 87th percentile ranking, 28221 Cinebench R23 multicore score, and 4005 PassMark single-thread score all indicate a processor that handles both single-threaded and multi-threaded tasks well. The AMD processor would be selected for scenarios requiring ECC memory support or more PCIe lanes, as those are features the Intel part does not offer. Without benchmark data for the AMD part, any performance claim about it would be speculative. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is the only one of the two with measured results, and those results place it in a competitive tier alongside the Intel Core 7 253PE, Intel Core 5 223PE, AMD Ryzen 9 7940H, and Intel Xeon 6507P.