AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 vs Intel Core i5-12600K Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents a largely one-sided comparison. The Intel Core i5-12600K wins 14 of the 15 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, while the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 secures a single victory. The most dramatic gaps appear in heavily threaded workloads, where the Intel part's additional cores and threads translate into substantial performance leads.

The largest delta recorded is in floating-point math, where the Intel Core i5-12600K scores 67217 against the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340's 39662, a 41% advantage. This is a significant margin that suggests the Intel architecture handles sustained FPU-heavy instruction streams with considerably more headroom. Data encryption shows a similar pattern, with Intel ahead by 39.3% (18485 versus 11212), indicating a clear edge in cryptographic workloads that can leverage parallel execution.

Data compression is another decisive Intel win. The Intel chip posts 344071 versus 221581, a 35.6% difference. This workload is highly sensitive to memory bandwidth and cache hierarchy, and the Intel part's larger shared L3 cache appears to play a role here. Random string sorting follows closely, with Intel ahead by 31.8% (35704 versus 24334), again pointing to a strong advantage in memory- and cache-bound operations.

Multi-threaded rendering benchmarks reinforce the story. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel Core i5-12600K reaches 17491 against the AMD's 11534, a 34.1% lead. The older Cinebench R15 multi-core test shows a 31.8% gap (2555 versus 1743). PassMark's multithread score puts Intel at 27608 versus 19215, a 30.4% difference. These results consistently favor the 10-core Intel design over the 6-core AMD part when all threads are active.

Integer math and extended instructions are closer but still firmly Intel territory. Integer math shows an 28% gap (87776 versus 63233), and extended instructions a 28.5% gap (22002 versus 15721). Physics simulation via PassMark yields 1525 versus 1084, a 28.9% deficit for the AMD chip. Prime number generation shows an 18.7% gap (91 versus 74), the narrowest of the multi-threaded losses.

Single-threaded results are much tighter. The Cinebench R23 single-core test gives Intel a 5.5% edge (1907 versus 1802), while PassMark single-thread shows 3926 versus 3758, a 4.3% difference. The one AMD win comes in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 scores 276 versus 275, a 0.4% margin that is essentially negligible. Overall average benchmark scores place the AMD part at 27932 and the Intel part at 27578, meaning the AMD CPU actually holds a 1.3% higher average across its full benchmark suite despite losing most head-to-head comparisons.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core i5-12600K wins 14 of 15 comparisons. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 wins only one, the Cinebench R15 single-core test, by 0.4%.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap?

A: The Intel chip leads by 34.1% in Cinebench R23 multi-core and by 31.8% in Cinebench R15 multi-core. PassMark multithread shows a 30.4% Intel advantage.

Q: Are single-threaded scores close?

A: Yes. Cinebench R23 single-core favors Intel by 5.5%, and PassMark single-thread favors Intel by 4.3%. The only AMD win is a 0.4% margin in Cinebench R15 single-core.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 has an average benchmark score of 27932, which is 0.1% higher than its nearest rival. The Intel Core i5-12600K has an average score of 27578, exactly matching its nearest rival.

Q: What is the biggest performance difference recorded?

A: Floating-point math shows the largest gap, with the Intel Core i5-12600K scoring 67217 versus 39662, a 41% difference.

Q: Where does the AMD processor outperform in the data?

A: The AMD part only wins the Cinebench R15 single-core test. It also holds a higher overall average benchmark score (27932 versus 27578) and a slightly higher percentile ranking at 80 versus 79.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 uses the Zen 5 architecture under the Krackan Point codename, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core i5-12600K uses the Alder Lake architecture under the Alder Lake-S codename, fabricated on Intel's 10 nm process. The die sizes differ modestly: the AMD chip measures 195 mm² while the Intel chip measures 215 mm².

Core counts diverge sharply. The AMD part offers 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel part provides 10 cores and 16 threads. This core advantage is the most likely explanation for the Intel chip's dominance in multi-threaded workloads. Cache hierarchies also differ. Both share an 80 KB L1 per core, but L2 is 1 MB per core on the AMD side versus 1.25 MB per core on Intel. The L3 cache is where the gap widens significantly: the AMD chip has 8 MB, while the Intel chip has 20 MB shared. This larger L3 cache likely contributes to the Intel lead in data compression and random string sorting.

Memory support differs in scope. The AMD processor supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with ECC memory enabled, while the Intel processor supports DDR4 and DDR5 without ECC. The AMD chip has a rated memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while no bandwidth figure is recorded for the Intel part. PCIe connectivity also differs: AMD provides Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes, while Intel provides Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics distinguish the two as well. The AMD part includes a Radeon 840M, while the Intel part includes UHD Graphics 770. The AMD processor is a mobile-market segment part on an AMD Socket FP8, whereas the Intel processor is a desktop-market segment part on Intel Socket 1700. The AMD chip is not multiplier unlocked, while the Intel chip is multiplier unlocked.

Specification Differences

The table below highlights only the fields where the two processors differ:

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 | Intel Core i5-12600K |

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

| Series | null | Core 12th Gen |

| Cores | 6 | 10 |

| Threads | 12 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.00 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.80 GHz | 4.90 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 125 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Alder Lake |

| Codename | Krackan Point | Alder Lake-S |

| Generation | Ryzen AI PRO 300 (Zen 5 / Zen 5c) | Core i5 (Alder Lake-S) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die Size | 195 mm² | 215 mm² |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1.25 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB | 20 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | null |

| ECC Memory | true | false |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 840M | UHD Graphics 770 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2025-01-05 | 2021-11-03 |

| Launch MSRP | null | $289 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | false | true |

| Part Number | 100-000001600 | SRL4T |

The TDP difference is stark: 28 W versus 125 W. This reflects the mobile versus desktop positioning, and it explains why the AMD chip can achieve competitive single-thread scores while consuming far less power. The Intel chip's higher boost clock of 4.90 GHz versus 4.80 GHz likely contributes to its single-thread lead.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture for raw performance. The Intel Core i5-12600K is the stronger processor in nearly every measured workload, with leads ranging from 4.3% in single-threaded tests to 41% in floating-point math. The 10-core, 16-thread configuration with 20 MB of L3 cache delivers decisive advantages in multi-threaded rendering, encryption, compression, and math-heavy tasks. Desktop users seeking maximum throughput should look to the Intel part, especially given its unlocked multiplier for overclocking.

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340, however, should not be dismissed. Its 28 W TDP, mobile socket, and support for LPDDR5X memory indicate a completely different intended environment. It achieves a higher overall average benchmark score of 27932 versus 27578 and a slightly higher percentile ranking of 80 versus 79. For a mobile processor, matching the Intel desktop chip within 4.3% on single-threaded PassMark scores is noteworthy. The AMD part also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the Intel chip.

The choice depends entirely on context. The Intel Core i5-12600K is the obvious pick for desktop performance, particularly for workloads that scale with cores and cache. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 is positioned for mobile platforms where power efficiency and a compact socket matter more than maximum multi-threaded output. The data does not show the AMD chip winning many benchmarks, but it shows a processor that delivers competitive single-thread performance and a superior average score despite operating in a different power class.

Where Each One Wins

Intel Core i5-12600K:

• Multi-threaded rendering: wins Cinebench R23 multi-core by 34.1% and Cinebench R15 multi-core by 31.8%
• Floating-point math: wins by 41%, the largest recorded gap
• Data encryption: wins by 39.3%
• Data compression: wins by 35.6%
• Random string sorting: wins by 31.8%
• PassMark multithread: wins by 30.4%
• Integer math: wins by 28%
• Extended instructions: wins by 28.5%
• Physics simulation: wins by 28.9%
• Prime number generation: wins by 18.7%
• Single-threaded tests: wins Cinebench R23 single-core by 5.5% and PassMark single-thread by 4.3%

AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340:

• Cinebench R15 single-core: wins by 0.4%
• Higher average benchmark score: 27932 versus 27578
• Higher percentile ranking: 80 versus 79
• ECC memory support: present on AMD, absent on Intel
• Lower TDP: 28 W versus 125 W, indicating far greater power efficiency
• Mobile socket with LPDDR5X support for portable platforms

The Intel Core i5-12600K is the clear winner for desktop computing workloads that demand maximum throughput. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 340 is the more sensible choice for mobile systems where power consumption and platform flexibility take precedence over raw multi-core performance. The benchmark data simply reflects two processors aimed at different markets, with Intel dominating the performance metrics and AMD offering a more efficient, mobile-oriented package.