AMD Ryzen 5 220 vs AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive performance hierarchy between these two AMD mobile processors. In every recorded head-to-head comparison, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 delivers a higher score, leaving the AMD Ryzen 5 220 without a single benchmark victory across the eleven measured tests. The magnitude of these wins varies substantially, ranging from a modest single-thread advantage to a massive 79.7 percent gap in prime number computation.

Starting with the largest differential, the PassMark find prime numbers test shows the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scoring 320 against the Ryzen 5 220's 65, a 79.7 percent lead. This test heavily favors processors with strong integer execution and higher core counts, which aligns with the AI Max+ 392's architecture. The extended instructions workload tells a similar story: the AI Max+ 392 scores 45,666 compared to 15,512, a 66 percent advantage. This category measures SIMD and specialized instruction throughput, where the newer Zen 5 design demonstrates clear superiority.

The floating point math test shows the AI Max+ 392 at 99,548 versus 35,500 for the Ryzen 5 220, a 64.3 percent gap. Integer math follows closely, with 152,414 versus 57,987, representing a 62 percent difference. These two workloads are fundamental indicators of raw arithmetic throughput, and the recorded data confirms the AI Max+ 392 processes both integer and floating-point operations at more than 2.5 times the rate of the Ryzen 5 220.

Data compression results show the AI Max+ 392 scoring 554,760 against 212,739, a 61.7 percent lead. Encryption performance shows a 55 percent gap, with 27,784 versus 12,493. The multithreaded PassMark score places the AI Max+ 392 at 45,231 compared to 18,582, a 58.9 percent margin. Physics simulation, often a strong indicator of multicore scaling, shows 2,887 versus 983, again a 66 percent difference.

Random string sorting, a test that stresses memory subsystem latency and cache behavior, gives the AI Max+ 392 a 59,487 score versus 25,433, a 57.2 percent advantage. The smallest differential appears in single-thread performance: the AI Max+ 392 scores 3,927 versus 3,646, a 7.2 percent lead. This narrower gap highlights that while the Zen 5 architecture improves single-core efficiency, the Ryzen 5 220's Zen 4 design remains competitive on a per-thread basis.

The average benchmark score in the database places the Ryzen 5 220 at 22,289, which sits within 0.3 percent of the Intel Core i7-10700K at 22,230 and 1.4 percent above the AMD Ryzen 5 3600X at 21,992. The Ryzen AI Max+ 392 averages 90,541, placing it 0.2 percent behind the Intel Xeon 654 at 90,717 and 2.7 percent ahead of the Intel Xeon w7-2575X at 88,172. These nearest rival comparisons show the AI Max+ 392 competing in workstation-class territory, while the Ryzen 5 220 aligns with upper-midrange desktop and mobile processors from prior generations.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge fundamentally at the architecture level. The Ryzen 5 220 uses Zen 4 cores under the Hawk Point codename, built on a 4 nm TSMC process with 6 cores and 12 threads. The Ryzen AI Max+ 392 employs Zen 5 cores under the Strix Halo codename, also on a 4 nm TSMC process, but doubles the core count to 12 cores and 24 threads. Both parts use TSMC as the foundry, but the AI Max+ 392 implements a dual-die design with two 70.6 mm² chiplets, whereas the Ryzen 5 220 uses a single 137 mm² die. The transistor count for the Ryzen 5 220 is listed at 20,900 million; the AI Max+ 392 does not have a recorded transistor figure in the database.

Cache allocation shows notable differences. The Ryzen 5 220 provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The AI Max+ 392 increases L1 to 80 KB per core, keeps L2 at 1 MB per core, and quadruples shared L3 to 64 MB. This larger L3 pool directly contributes to the AI Max+ 392's strong performance in cache-sensitive workloads like random string sorting and data compression, where repeated data access patterns benefit from larger on-chip storage.

Memory architecture differs substantially. The Ryzen 5 220 supports DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 89.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The AI Max+ 392 uses LPDDR5X with a quad-channel bus and 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth, nearly three times the throughput. The AI Max+ 392 also supports ECC memory, while the Ryzen 5 220 does not. For memory-bound workloads, the quad-channel LPDDR5X configuration provides a clear structural advantage that appears in the bandwidth-intensive PassMark tests.

PCIe connectivity shows a modest difference: the Ryzen 5 220 offers Gen 4 with 14 CPU lanes, while the AI Max+ 392 provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes. Both are PCIe Gen 4, so the difference lies only in lane count. The integrated graphics also differ: the Ryzen 5 220 pairs with a Radeon 740M, while the AI Max+ 392 includes a Radeon 8060S. The database does not include graphics benchmarks for either part, so no numerical comparison of GPU performance is available.

Base clocks are identical at 3.20 GHz for both processors. Boost clocks differ slightly: the Ryzen 5 220 reaches 4.90 GHz, while the AI Max+ 392 reaches 5.00 GHz. Thermal design power differs considerably, with the Ryzen 5 220 rated at 28 W and the AI Max+ 392 at 55 W. The higher TDP budget for the AI Max+ 392 supports its additional cores, larger cache, and higher boost clock. Socket types also differ: the Ryzen 5 220 uses AMD Socket FP8, while the AI Max+ 392 uses AMD Socket FP11. Both are mobile sockets, but they are not interchangeable.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the recorded benchmark data, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 wins every single measured workload. There is no category in which the Ryzen 5 220 records a higher score. This makes the use-case analysis straightforward: the AI Max+ 392 is the superior processor across all tested dimensions, from single-thread integer work to heavily multithreaded physics simulation.

The narrowest margin occurs in single-thread performance, where the AI Max+ 392 leads by only 7.2 percent. This suggests that for lightly threaded applications, such as basic office productivity or web browsing, the Ryzen 5 220 remains reasonably competitive. The Zen 4 cores in the Ryzen 5 220 deliver single-thread scores of 3,646, which is within striking distance of the AI Max+ 392's 3,927. Users running primarily single-threaded legacy software would experience a smaller performance gap than in any other workload.

The widest margin appears in prime number finding, where the AI Max+ 392 leads by 79.7 percent. This workload scales almost linearly with core count and per-core integer efficiency, and the AI Max+ 392's 12 Zen 5 cores at a 5.00 GHz boost clock produce a dominant result. Similarly large gaps appear in extended instructions, floating point, and physics, each showing a 66 percent advantage. These workloads benefit from the AI Max+ 392's combination of more cores, larger L3 cache, and higher memory bandwidth.

For multithreaded content creation, data analysis, or scientific computing, the AI Max+ 392 is the clear choice based on the data. The 58.9 percent multithread score advantage and 61.7 percent data compression lead indicate that parallel workloads will see substantial improvements. The 55 percent encryption advantage also makes the AI Max+ 392 preferable for security-sensitive tasks that rely on cryptographic operations.

The Ryzen 5 220, while never winning a benchmark, still offers a functional profile for lighter mobile use. Its 28 W TDP suggests lower power consumption than the AI Max+ 392's 55 W rating, which could translate to longer battery life in thin-and-light laptops. However, the database provides no power or battery measurements, so this remains a qualitative observation based on the TDP figures alone.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 5 220 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The AI Max+ 392 doubles both the core count and thread count.

Q: What is the single-thread performance difference between the two?

A: In the PassMark single-thread test, the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 3,927 versus 3,646 for the Ryzen 5 220, a 7.2 percent advantage. This is the smallest performance gap between the two processors in any recorded benchmark.

Q: How much larger is the L3 cache on the AI Max+ 392?

A: The Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 64 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Ryzen 5 220 has 16 MB. The AI Max+ 392 provides four times the L3 capacity.

Q: Do both processors use the same memory type?

A: No. The Ryzen 5 220 supports DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses LPDDR5X with a quad-channel bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 supports ECC memory. The Ryzen 5 220 does not list ECC support in the database.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds for each processor?

A: The Ryzen 5 220 has a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, while the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 reaches 5.00 GHz. Their base clocks are identical at 3.20 GHz.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 220 | AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 |

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

| Cores | 6 | 12 |

| Threads | 12 | 24 |

| Boost Clock | 4.90 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 55 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | AMD Socket FP11 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Zen 5 |

| Codename | Hawk Point | Strix Halo |

| Die Size | 137 mm² | 2x 70.6 mm² |

| Transistors | 20,900 million | Not recorded |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 16 MB (shared) | 64 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Quad-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 256.0 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe Lanes | Gen 4, 14 Lanes | Gen 4, 16 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 740M | Radeon 8060S |

| Part Number | 100-000001611 | 100-000001979 |

| Release Date | 2025-01-05 | 2026-01-05 |