AMD Ryzen 5 40 vs Intel Core Ultra X9 378H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a complete sweep for the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H across all 15 shared benchmark tests. The AMD Ryzen 5 40 does not register a single win in any direct comparison. The margins are substantial, ranging from a 44.4% gap in single-threaded workloads to a 94.4% deficit in prime number computation.

In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Intel part scores 32553 against 4841 for the AMD chip, a delta of 85.1%. The single-core R23 result shows 4595 versus 1150, a 75% difference. Cinebench R15 tells a similar story: the Intel processor delivers 3281 multicore points and 462 single-core points, while the AMD processor manages 790 and 165.5 respectively, translating to deltas of 75.9% and 64.2%.

PassMark workloads reinforce the pattern. The largest relative gap appears in the find prime numbers test, where Intel scores 357 and AMD scores 20, a 94.4% difference. Floating point math shows 114500 against 15194, an 86.7% gap. Physics testing shows 3404 versus 432, a 87.3% difference. Extended instructions produce 31315 versus 6437, a 79.4% gap. Data encryption shows 29840 versus 6646, a 77.7% difference.

The narrowest margins appear in single-threaded PassMark testing. The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H scores 4453 in both passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread, while the AMD Ryzen 5 40 scores 2477 in both, a 44.4% delta. Data compression shows 386591 versus 141533, a 63.4% gap. Integer math delivers 92603 versus 31598, a 65.9% difference. Random string sorting produces 44648 versus 15124, a 66.1% gap. Multithread performance shows 38298 versus 9341, a 75.6% difference.

The average benchmark score positions the Intel processor at 47468, placing it in the 89th percentile of all CPUs tracked. The AMD processor averages 15882, sitting in the 70th percentile. The nearest rivals for the Intel part include the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 5945 at 47527 (0.1% higher), the Intel Core i7-13700KF at 47330 (0.3% lower), the Intel Core Ultra 7 265T at 47697 (0.5% higher), and the Intel Core i9-12900F at 47176 (0.6% lower). For the AMD part, the closest neighbors are the AMD EPYC 75F3 at 15859 (0.1% lower), the Intel Core Ultra 5 134U at 15910 (0.2% higher), the AMD EPYC 9354P at 15826 (0.4% lower), and the AMD EPYC 9334 at 15940 (0.4% higher).

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most benchmark comparisons?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H wins all 15 head-to-head benchmark tests. The AMD Ryzen 5 40 records zero wins.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two processors?

A: The largest gap is in the PassMark find prime numbers test. The Intel processor scores 357, the AMD processor scores 20, producing a 94.4% delta.

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

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Intel part scores 4595 versus 1150 for AMD, a 75% gap. In PassMark single-thread testing, the Intel part scores 4453 versus 2477, a 44.4% gap. The Intel processor leads in both cases.

Q: What is the difference in average benchmark scores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H has an average benchmark score of 47468, while the AMD Ryzen 5 40 has an average of 15882. This places the Intel part in the 89th percentile and the AMD part in the 70th percentile of all CPUs.

Q: Does the AMD processor win in any specific workload category?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the Intel processor winning every category, including data compression, encryption, extended instructions, floating point math, integer math, multithread, physics, random string sorting, and single-thread tests.

Q: How do the processors compare in memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel processor supports LPDDR5X memory with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD processor supports LPDDR5 memory with 88.0 GB/s bandwidth. Both use dual-channel memory buses.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design generations. The AMD Ryzen 5 40 uses the Zen 2 architecture under the Mendocino codename, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H uses the Panther Lake codename from the Panther Lake-H generation, fabricated on a 3 nm process at Intel's own foundry.

Core counts differ sharply. The AMD part provides 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel part provides 16 cores and 16 threads. This means the Intel processor has four times the physical cores but no hyperthreading, while the AMD processor relies on simultaneous multithreading to reach 8 threads from 4 cores.

Cache hierarchies diverge significantly. The AMD processor allocates 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 4 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel processor allocates 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part has substantially more cache at every level, particularly a 4.5x advantage in shared L3.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The AMD processor uses the Radeon 610M, while the Intel processor uses the Arc B390. The PCIe interface also differs: the AMD processor provides Gen 3 with 4 CPU lanes, while the Intel processor provides Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes.

Memory support is another distinguishing factor. The AMD processor supports LPDDR5, while the Intel processor supports LPDDR5X. The Intel part offers 153.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth versus 88.0 GB/s for the AMD part. Neither processor supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Specification Differences

The base clock differs: the AMD Ryzen 5 40 runs at 2.80 GHz, while the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H runs at 2.00 GHz. The boost clock reverses the order: the AMD part reaches 4.30 GHz, while the Intel part reaches 5.00 GHz. The Intel processor has a higher maximum frequency despite a lower base.

Thermal design power differs by 10 watts. The AMD processor has a TDP of 15, while the Intel processor has a TDP of 25. Both target the mobile market segment and are currently marked as active in production.

The socket and packaging are incompatible. The AMD processor uses AMD Socket FT6, while the Intel processor uses Intel BGA 2540. The die size for the AMD part is listed at 100 mm², while the die size for the Intel part is not recorded in the database.

The release dates differ by roughly six months. The AMD Ryzen 5 40 was released on 2025-09-30, while the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H was released on 2026-04-03. Neither processor has a recorded launch MSRP in the database.

The process node gives the Intel part a manufacturing advantage: 3 nm versus 6 nm. The Intel processor uses its own foundry, while the AMD processor uses TSMC. The Intel part belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3, while the AMD part belongs to the Ryzen 5 generation based on Zen 2 Mendocino.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates that the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H is the superior processor in every measured workload. The average benchmark score of 47468 places it in the 89th percentile, while the AMD Ryzen 5 40 sits at 15882 in the 70th percentile. The Intel part outperforms the AMD part by margins ranging from 44.4% to 94.4% across all 15 shared tests.

The Intel processor's nearest rivals are desktop-class parts: the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 5945, the Intel Core i7-13700KF, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265T, and the Intel Core i9-12900F. All of these sit within 0.6% of the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H's average score. The AMD Ryzen 5 40's nearest rivals are server processors: the AMD EPYC 75F3, the AMD EPYC 9354P, the AMD EPYC 9334, and the Intel Core Ultra 5 134U. These sit within 0.4% of the AMD part's average score.

The core count difference of 16 versus 4 explains much of the multicore gap. The Intel processor also has a higher boost clock at 5.00 GHz versus 4.30 GHz, more cache at every level, faster memory bandwidth at 153.6 GB/s versus 88.0 GB/s, and a newer process node at 3 nm versus 6 nm.

The AMD processor does offer a lower TDP at 15 versus 25, which may matter for power-constrained designs. However, the benchmark results show that this power advantage does not translate into any performance win. The data confirms that the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H is the stronger part in absolute terms across all recorded workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H wins in every benchmark category recorded in the head-to-head comparison. The largest margins appear in prime number computation (94.4% gap), floating point math (86.7% gap), and physics (87.3% gap). These indicate strong advantages in computational workloads that stress the execution units and memory subsystem.

The Intel part also leads substantially in Cinebench multicore tests, with an 85.1% gap in R23 and a 75.9% gap in R15. This points to significant multi-threaded rendering performance. The single-core Cinebench R23 gap of 75% further confirms that the Intel architecture delivers higher per-thread throughput.

Data compression shows a 63.4% gap, data encryption shows a 77.7% gap, and extended instructions show a 79.4% gap. Integer math produces a 65.9% gap, while random string sorting produces a 66.1% gap. These results indicate that the Intel processor handles mixed workloads with consistently higher throughput.

The narrowest Intel advantage appears in PassMark single-thread testing at 44.4%. This remains a substantial lead, but it is the closest the AMD processor comes to matching the Intel part in any workload. The AMD processor's single-thread score of 2477 is still competitive when viewed against its own tier of rivals, but it falls well short of the Intel part's 4453.

The AMD Ryzen 5 40 has no benchmark category where it leads. Its strengths are limited to lower TDP and an earlier release date. For workloads that prioritize energy efficiency over performance, the AMD part may be the appropriate choice. For any workload that requires compute throughput, the recorded data shows the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H as the definitive winner.