AMD Ryzen AI 5 435 vs AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data separates these two AMD mobile processors into distinct performance tiers. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 dominates the comparison, winning 14 of the 15 recorded head-to-head tests. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 435 claims only a single victory, in Cinebench R15 single-core. The Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 holds an 85th percentile ranking among all CPUs, while the Ryzen AI 5 435 sits at the 80th percentile. Average benchmark scores confirm the gap: 35,719 for the PRO 350 versus 28,128 for the 435, a difference that places the PRO 350 in the company of desktop-class rivals like the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X, which it trails by just 0.5 percent, and the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H, which it matches at a 0.1 percent delta. The Ryzen AI 5 435, by contrast, trades blows with the Intel Core i5-13490F (0.2 percent behind) and the Intel Core i5-14500T (0.2 percent ahead). Users who need maximum throughput across multithreaded workloads should select the Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350. The Ryzen AI 5 435 makes sense only for scenarios where the single-core Cinebench R15 result is the priority, or where the lower core count is sufficient and the 4 MB smaller L3 cache is acceptable.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen AI 5 435 wins exactly one benchmark: Cinebench R15 single-core, scoring 260 against 247 for the PRO 350, a 5.3 percent edge. This result is curious given that the PRO 350 has a higher boost clock of 5.00 GHz versus 4.50 GHz. The data suggests the 435's Zen 5 core configuration in this specific legacy test can outperform the larger chip, possibly due to load balancing or thermal behavior that favors the smaller die layout. However, this advantage does not carry into Cinebench R23 single-core, where the PRO 350 wins 1,954 to 1,816, a 7.1 percent margin. The PRO 350 also wins PassMark single-thread by 3.6 percent, scoring 3,872 versus 3,734.

Everywhere else, the PRO 350 is the clear winner. Its largest margins come in PassMark integer math (84,868 versus 61,026, a 28.1 percent advantage) and PassMark find prime numbers (81 versus 58, a 28.4 percent advantage). The PRO 350 also shows strong gains in Cinebench R15 multi-core (2,336.5 versus 1,686, up 27.8 percent) and Cinebench R23 multi-core (14,278.5 versus 11,333, up 20.6 percent). These results indicate that the PRO 350 is the processor for rendering, compilation, data processing, and any workload that scales with cores and cache.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the Zen 5 architecture, the TSMC 4 nm process node, and the AMD Socket FP8 platform. The similarities end there in several key areas. The Ryzen AI 5 435 belongs to the Ryzen AI 400 generation (Zen 5 / Zen 5c) with the codename Gorgon Point. The Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 belongs to the Ryzen AI PRO 300 generation (Zen 5 / Zen 5c) with the codename Krackan Point. The core counts differ significantly: the 435 has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the PRO 350 has 8 cores and 16 threads. This two-core, four-thread advantage explains much of the multithreaded performance gap. The PRO 350 also doubles the L3 cache from 4 MB to 8 MB, which directly benefits workloads that repeatedly access larger datasets. Both chips have 80 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core.

The PRO 350 carries a larger die at 195 mm², though the database does not record a die size for the 435. The boost clock favors the PRO 350 at 5.00 GHz versus 4.50 GHz, while both share a 2.00 GHz base clock and a 28 W TDP. The integrated graphics differ: the 435 uses the Radeon 840M, while the PRO 350 uses the Radeon 860M. PCIe lane counts also differ, with the PRO 350 offering 16 Gen 4 lanes (CPU only) against 14 Gen 4 lanes on the 435. Memory support is identical: both support DDR5 and LPDDR5X in dual-channel configuration with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support. The release dates differ by roughly one year, with the PRO 350 released in January 2025 and the 435 in January 2026. The production status for both is Active, and neither chip has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 435 has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: How much larger is the L3 cache on the PRO 350?

A: The PRO 350 has 8 MB of L3 cache, double the 4 MB found on the Ryzen AI 5 435. Both share 80 KB L1 per core and 1 MB L2 per core.

Q: Does the Ryzen AI 5 435 win any benchmark?

A: Yes. It wins Cinebench R15 single-core with a score of 260 versus 247 for the PRO 350, a 5.3 percent advantage. It loses the remaining 14 recorded head-to-head tests.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference?

A: The PRO 350 averages 35,719, while the 435 averages 28,128. The PRO 350 also ranks at the 85th percentile versus the 80th percentile for the 435.

Q: Do both chips support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Ryzen AI 5 435 and the Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 support ECC memory, along with DDR5 and LPDDR5X in dual-channel mode with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which chip has the higher boost clock?

A: The PRO 350 boosts to 5.00 GHz, while the 435 boosts to 4.50 GHz. Their base clocks are identical at 2.00 GHz, and both have a 28 W TDP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single margin in the entire comparison belongs to PassMark find prime numbers, where the PRO 350 scores 81 against 58 for the 435, a 28.4 percent advantage. This test stresses integer arithmetic and memory access patterns, so the combination of two extra cores and double the L3 cache explains the result. PassMark integer math shows a nearly identical gap: 84,868 versus 61,026, a 28.1 percent difference. The PRO 350 also leads Cinebench R15 multi-core by 27.8 percent, scoring 2,336.5 against 1,686. That test is particularly sensitive to core count and sustained all-core boost behavior.

Cinebench R23 multi-core confirms the trend with a 20.6 percent win for the PRO 350, 14,278.5 versus 11,333. PassMark data encryption shows a 23.2 percent gap (14,462 versus 11,110), while data compression trails at 20 percent (281,834 versus 225,374). Floating-point math favors the PRO 350 by 21.3 percent (51,639 versus 40,627). PassMark multithread results show a 20.8 percent advantage (23,994 versus 19,000). The smallest multi-core margin appears in PassMark physics, where the PRO 350 leads by 18.4 percent (1,318 versus 1,075).

Single-threaded results are closer. PassMark single-thread shows the PRO 350 ahead by just 3.6 percent (3,872 versus 3,734). Cinebench R23 single-core gives the PRO 350 a 7.1 percent win (1,954 versus 1,816). The sole exception is Cinebench R15 single-core, where the 435 wins 260 to 247. That 5.3 percent reversal is the only recorded instance where the smaller chip outperforms the larger one. The pattern across the benchmark suite indicates that the 435's single-core advantage is isolated to one legacy test, while the PRO 350 maintains a consistent lead in every other metric, including both newer single-core tests.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show the following differences between the two processors. Core count: 6 for the 435, 8 for the PRO 350. Thread count: 12 versus 16. Boost clock: 4.50 GHz versus 5.00 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB versus 8 MB. Die size: not recorded for the 435, 195 mm² for the PRO 350. Codename: Gorgon Point versus Krackan Point. Generation: Ryzen AI 400 (Zen 5 / Zen 5c) versus Ryzen AI PRO 300 (Zen 5 / Zen 5c). Integrated graphics: Radeon 840M versus Radeon 860M. PCIe lanes (CPU only): 14 Gen 4 lanes versus 16 Gen 4 lanes. Release date: January 2026 versus January 2025. Part number: 100-000001337 versus 100-000000713. Identical specifications include the 2.00 GHz base clock, 28 W TDP, AMD Socket FP8, Zen 5 architecture, TSMC 4 nm process, 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory support, dual-channel bus, 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, ECC support, and locked multipliers.