AMD Ryzen 5 220 vs AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 Comparison

AMD Ryzen 5 220 and AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 represent two distinct strategies within AMD’s mobile lineup, one a lean 6-core part built for efficiency, the other a heavy 8-core processor with a massive integrated GPU. The benchmark data shows a clear hierarchy: the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 wins 14 of the 15 head-to-head comparisons, while the Ryzen 5 220 takes a single but significant victory in Cinebench R23 single-core.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 dominates the multicore tests. In Cinebench R15 multicore, it scores 2872 against the Ryzen 5 220’s 1562, a 45.6% advantage. The gap narrows in Cinebench R23 multicore, where the Max+ 388 records 18759 versus 15502, a 17.4% lead. This pattern holds across PassMark’s suite. The Max+ 388 doubles the Ryzen 5 220 in PassMark integer math, scoring 109588 versus 57987 (47.1% ahead), and in floating point math it reaches 72722 against 35500, a 51.2% difference. The largest single delta appears in PassMark extended instructions, where the Max+ 388’s 32719 beats the 15512 of the Ryzen 5 220 by 52.6%.

The Max+ 388 also leads in every PassMark subtest except none. Data compression shows 400887 versus 212739, a 46.9% margin. Data encryption results in 20092 versus 12493, a 37.8% gap. Prime number finding scores 145 versus 65, a 55.2% advantage, the largest relative win in the dataset. Physics simulation scores 1843 versus 983, a 46.7% lead. Random string sorting reaches 43196 versus 25433, a 41.1% delta. The multithread PassMark score is 33486 versus 18582, a 44.5% gap.

Single-thread performance tells a different story. The Ryzen 5 220 wins Cinebench R23 single-core with 2188 points against 1960, an 11.6% lead. This is the only test where the Ryzen 5 220 comes out ahead. However, in Cinebench R15 single-core, the Max+ 388 wins with 298 versus 220, a 26.2% margin. PassMark single-thread also favors the Max+ 388, with 4185 points against 3646, a 12.9% delta. The Ryzen 5 220’s R23 single-core win appears to be an outlier relative to the other single-thread tests, where the Max+ 388 consistently posts higher numbers.

The average benchmark score confirms the overall hierarchy. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 sits at 49796, placing it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs. The Ryzen 5 220 averages 22289, good for the 75th percentile. The Max+ 388’s nearest rival, the Intel Core 9 273PE, scores 49845, a delta of only 0.1%, meaning the two are statistically tied. The Ryzen 5 220’s closest competitor, the Intel Core i7-10700K, scores 22230, a 0.3% difference. Both parts sit in tightly contested performance brackets.

Architecture Differences

The Ryzen 5 220 uses the Zen 4 architecture with the Hawk Point codename, while the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 uses Zen 5 with the Strix Halo codename. Both are built on TSMC’s 4 nm process, but the silicon differs substantially. The Ryzen 5 220 has 6 cores and 12 threads, a 3.20 GHz base clock and a 4.90 GHz boost clock. The Max+ 388 has 8 cores and 16 threads, a 3.60 GHz base clock and a 5.00 GHz boost clock. The Max+ 388’s higher base and boost clocks contribute to its multicore advantage, though the Ryzen 5 220’s R23 single-core win suggests clock speed alone does not explain every result.

Cache configurations diverge significantly. The Ryzen 5 220 provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The Max+ 388 increases L1 to 80 KB per core, keeps L2 at 1 MB per core, and doubles L3 to 32 MB shared. The larger L3 cache on the Max+ 388 helps in workloads that benefit from shared data access, a factor visible in the data compression and encryption scores.

Memory support marks a major split. The Ryzen 5 220 uses DDR5 with a dual-channel bus, delivering 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Max+ 388 uses LPDDR5X with a quad-channel bus, reaching 256.0 GB/s. That 2.85x bandwidth advantage directly impacts the PassMark extended instructions and integer math results, where the Max+ 388’s margins exceed 47%. The Max+ 388 also supports ECC memory, while the Ryzen 5 220 does not. PCIe lanes differ slightly: the Ryzen 5 220 has 14 Gen 4 lanes, while the Max+ 388 has 16 Gen 4 lanes.

The integrated graphics represent a stark contrast. The Ryzen 5 220 pairs with a Radeon 740M, while the Max+ 388 carries a Radeon 8060S. The Max+ 388’s larger die, listed as 2x 70.6 mm², versus the Ryzen 5 220’s single 137 mm² die, reflects the additional compute resources. Transistor counts are documented for the Ryzen 5 220 at 20,900 million but not listed for the Max+ 388. Power targets differ as well: the Ryzen 5 220 runs at 28 W TDP, while the Max+ 388 draws 55 W TDP. Sockets also differ, with the Ryzen 5 220 using FP8 and the Max+ 388 using FP11. Both parts are locked, with no unlocked multiplier.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 wins in every heavily threaded scenario. Cinebench R15 multicore shows a 45.6% lead, and PassMark multithread confirms a 44.5% gap. Integer math, floating point math, data compression, encryption, physics, and random string sorting all favor the Max+ 388 by margins between 37.8% and 55.2%. The quad-channel memory and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth give it a decisive edge in memory-intensive benchmarks. The 8-core, 16-thread configuration with 32 MB of L3 cache is suited for rendering, scientific computation, and any workload that scales across cores.

The Ryzen 5 220 takes a single win in Cinebench R23 single-core, where its 2188 score beats the Max+ 388’s 1960 by 11.6%. This suggests the Ryzen 5 220’s Zen 4 architecture, at its 4.90 GHz boost clock, can outperform the Zen 5 part in a lightly threaded rendering task. However, the Max+ 388 wins Cinebench R15 single-core and PassMark single-thread, so the R23 result appears workload-specific rather than a general single-thread superiority. The Ryzen 5 220’s lower 28 W TDP also makes it the more power-efficient choice, though the database does not record power consumption measurements.

The Ryzen 5 220’s 16 MB L3 cache and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth are adequate for everyday productivity and light content creation, but the benchmark data shows it trailing by 37.8% to 55.2% in the PassMark suite. The Max+ 388’s 90th percentile ranking versus the Ryzen 5 220’s 75th percentile places the two parts in different performance classes. The Max+ 388’s 49796 average score puts it near the Intel Core 9 273PE and AMD Ryzen 9 7900, while the Ryzen 5 220’s 22289 average aligns with the Intel Core i5-13500H and Intel Core i7-1270P.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 220 wins with 2188 points, a 11.6% lead over the Ryzen AI Max+ 388’s 1960.

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

A: The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 leads by 55.2% in PassMark find prime numbers, scoring 145 versus 65.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 provides 256.0 GB/s via quad-channel LPDDR5X, while the Ryzen 5 220 offers 89.6 GB/s via dual-channel DDR5.

Q: Which processor ranks higher in the overall database percentile?

A: The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 sits in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, while the Ryzen 5 220 sits in the 75th percentile.

Q: Does the Ryzen 5 220 win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison?

A: It wins one test: Cinebench R23 single-core, with a score of 2188 versus 1960.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Ryzen 5 220 has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has 8 cores and 16 threads.

The Verdict

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is the clear performance leader. It wins 14 of 15 head-to-head benchmarks, holds a 90th percentile ranking, and delivers a 49,796 average benchmark score. Its 8-core Zen 5 design, 32 MB of L3 cache, and 256.0 GB/s quad-channel memory make it the choice for users who need maximum multicore throughput, large data handling, or the higher-end Radeon 8060S integrated graphics. The 55 W TDP is a trade-off for that performance, but the data shows no scenario where the Ryzen 5 220 outpaces it except a single Cinebench R23 single-core run.

The AMD Ryzen 5 220 is the part for efficiency-focused workloads. Its 28 W TDP, 6-core Zen 4 design, and 16 MB L3 cache deliver a 75th percentile ranking with an average score of 22289. It wins exactly one test, Cinebench R23 single-core, where its 2188 score beats the Max+ 388 by 11.6%. For users who prioritize battery life and light single-threaded tasks, the Ryzen 5 220 offers a viable alternative, but the benchmark data is unambiguous: against the Ryzen AI Max+ 388, it loses nearly every measurable comparison. The Max+ 388 is the superior processor by a wide margin.