AMD Ryzen 5 130 vs Intel Core Ultra X9 378H Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 130 and the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H are two mobile processors with different design goals. The database shows the Intel part holds the performance lead, but the AMD part has its own strengths.

The Verdict

The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H is the dominant performer in the recorded data. Its average benchmark score of 47,468 places it at the 89th percentile of all CPUs, and its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 5945, Intel Core i7-13700KF, Intel Core Ultra 7 265T, and Intel Core i9-12900F. The AMD Ryzen 5 130, by contrast, has no recorded benchmark scores and sits at the 50th percentile, indicating it is a mid-range part. The Intel chip delivers far higher multi-core throughput thanks to its 16 cores and 16 threads, while the AMD chip offers 6 cores and 12 threads. The AMD processor is the choice for systems prioritizing lower power draw (28 W TDP) and ECC memory support, while the Intel processor is for users who need maximum compute performance in a mobile package.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures. The AMD Ryzen 5 130 uses the Zen 3+ architecture, codenamed Rembrandt-R, manufactured on a 6 nm process by TSMC. The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H uses the Panther Lake architecture, part of the Core Ultra Series 3, manufactured on a 3 nm process by Intel itself. The Intel process node is significantly more advanced, which contributes to its higher boost clock of 5.00 GHz compared to the AMD's 4.55 GHz.

The core configurations diverge sharply. The AMD chip has 6 cores and 12 threads, meaning it uses simultaneous multithreading (SMT) to process two threads per core. The Intel chip has 16 cores and 16 threads, with no SMT, but it compensates with a much higher physical core count. Cache hierarchies also differ: the AMD chip provides 64 KB L1 and 512 KB L2 per core, plus 16 MB shared L3. The Intel chip provides 192 KB L1 and 2.5 MB L2 per core, plus 18 MB shared L3. The Intel part has more total cache capacity, which aids in data-heavy workloads.

Memory support is another key split. The AMD chip supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, yielding 76.8 GB/s of bandwidth, and it supports ECC memory. The Intel chip supports LPDDR5X memory, also dual-channel, but with double the bandwidth at 153.6 GB/s, and it does not support ECC. The PCIe interfaces differ as well: the AMD part offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part offers Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics are distinct, with the AMD chip using a Radeon 660M and the Intel chip using an Arc B390.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H has 16 cores and 16 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 5 130 has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What is the difference in boost clock speeds?

A: The Intel chip boosts to 5.00 GHz, while the AMD chip boosts to 4.55 GHz.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 130 supports ECC memory; the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H does not.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Intel chip provides 153.6 GB/s of bandwidth with LPDDR5X memory, exactly double the 76.8 GB/s of the AMD chip with DDR5 memory.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each?

A: The Intel chip has an average benchmark score of 47,468 and sits at the 89th percentile, while the AMD chip has no recorded benchmark scores and sits at the 50th percentile.

Q: Which processor has a smaller process node?

A: The Intel chip uses a 3 nm process, while the AMD chip uses a 6 nm process.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 130 | Intel Core Ultra X9 378H |

|----------------|-----------------|--------------------------|

| Cores | 6 | 16 |

| Threads | 12 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.90 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.55 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 25 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP7 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Architecture | Zen 3+ | Not specified |

| Codename | Rembrandt-R | Panther Lake |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die Size | 210 mm² | Not specified |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB per core | 192 KB per core |

| L2 Cache | 512 KB per core | 2.5 MB per core |

| L3 Cache | 16 MB shared | 18 MB shared |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 153.6 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 4 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 660M | Arc B390 |

| Release Date | 2025-09-30 | 2026-04-03 |

| Part Number | 100-000000992(FP7r2) | Unknown |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database has no direct head-to-head benchmark results between these two processors. However, the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H has an extensive set of individual benchmark scores, while the AMD Ryzen 5 130 has none. This absence of data for the AMD part is itself informative: the Intel chip is the only one with recorded performance metrics.

For the Intel chip, the Cinebench results show a strong multi-core profile. In Cinebench R23, it scores 32,553 multi-core and 4,595 single-core. In Cinebench R20, the scores are 13,672 multi-core and 1,929 single-core. In Cinebench R15, the scores are 3,281 multi-core and 462 single-core. The PassMark suite further details its capabilities. It scores 386,591 in data compression, 29,840 in data encryption, 31,315 in extended instructions, 357 in finding prime numbers, 114,500 in floating point math, 92,603 in integer math, 38,298 in multithread, 3,404 in physics, 44,648 in random string sorting, and 4,453 in single thread.

The Intel chip's nearest rivals in the database are all high-end desktop or mobile parts. It is 0.1% behind the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 5945 (47,527 average score), 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core i7-13700KF (47,330), 0.5% behind the Intel Core Ultra 7 265T (47,697), and 0.6% ahead of the Intel Core i9-12900F (47,176). These deltas are all within 1%, indicating the Core Ultra X9 378H performs at the same level as these established flagship processors.

The AMD Ryzen 5 130 has no benchmark entries, no average score, and no nearest rivals in the database. Its percentile rank of 50 places it at the median of all CPUs, which suggests it is a mainstream part rather than a performance leader. Without any recorded scores, it is impossible to state a precise performance margin between the two chips from the data.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H wins in every recorded performance metric. Its 16 cores and 16 threads, combined with a 5.00 GHz boost clock, deliver multi-threaded scores that rival parts like the Intel Core i7-13700KF and Intel Core i9-12900F. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32,553 and the PassMark multithread score of 38,298 confirm its capability in heavily parallel workloads. The single-core performance is also strong, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4,595 and a PassMark single-thread score of 4,453. The Intel chip also benefits from a 3 nm process node, 18 MB of L3 cache, and 153.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth, all of which support sustained compute.

The AMD Ryzen 5 130 has no recorded benchmark wins, but it wins in specific system-level attributes. Its 28 W TDP is lower than the Intel chip's 25 W, which is a counterintuitive data point: the AMD part actually has a higher TDP. The AMD chip supports ECC memory, which the Intel chip does not, making it suitable for error-sensitive workloads. The AMD chip also uses a standard DDR5 memory interface, while the Intel chip requires LPDDR5X, which may affect platform compatibility. The AMD chip offers 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, which is more than the Intel chip's 4 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, potentially providing more expansion options despite the older standard. The AMD part is also the only one with a specified die size of 210 mm², indicating a larger physical die.

In terms of use cases, the data points to the Intel chip for compute-heavy tasks: video rendering, scientific simulation, and software compilation, where its 16 cores and high bandwidth shine. The AMD chip is for systems requiring ECC memory, which is common in data integrity-focused applications, and for users who may need more PCIe lanes for peripherals. The Intel chip is the clear choice for raw speed, while the AMD chip offers features that the Intel part lacks, namely ECC support and a higher lane count for expansion.