AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 vs Intel Core 5 130UL Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a stark contrast in available benchmark coverage between these two processors. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 has a full suite of PassMark measurements, while the Intel Core 5 130UL has no benchmark entries in the database. This makes a direct score-for-score comparison impossible, so the analysis must rely on the AMD part's absolute results and its position against other CPUs, then assess the Intel part based on its architectural profile and percentile ranking.

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 delivers a multi-thread score of 19091, a single-thread score of 3757, and an average benchmark score of 37762. Its percentile ranking of 86 means it outperforms 86 percent of all CPUs in the database. The nearest rivals bracket this average closely: the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 scores 37804 (0.1 percent ahead), the Intel Core 5 211E scores 37829 (0.2 percent ahead), and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 scores 37904 (0.4 percent ahead). On the other side, the Intel Core i5-13600K scores 37685, which is 0.2 percent behind the Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435. These deltas are all within a fraction of a percent, indicating that the AMD part sits in a tightly contested performance cluster.

In specific workloads, the Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 shows notable strengths. The data compression test returns 232803, a very high figure that suggests strong throughput for compression workloads. Integer math scores 60879, floating point math scores 41114, and extended instructions score 16724. Random string sorting produces 24936, while data encryption records 11267. The find prime numbers test is comparatively low at 57, which is typical for a workload that depends heavily on single-core efficiency and branch prediction. Physics simulation scores 995.

The Intel Core 5 130UL has no benchmark scores recorded, no average score, no nearest rivals, and no head-to-head results. Its percentile ranking of 50 places it exactly at the median of all CPUs in the database. Without direct measurements, the data cannot confirm how it would perform against the AMD part in any specific test. The only quantitative comparison available is the percentile gap: 86 versus 50.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 wins in every measurable category simply because it has data. Its multi-thread score of 19091 and single-thread score of 3757 establish a baseline for productivity and general responsiveness. The data compression score of 232803 indicates a strong showing for archive handling and data-heavy tasks. The encryption score of 11267 and extended instructions score of 16724 suggest capable performance for security-related workloads and vectorized code. The integer math score of 60879 and floating point math score of 41114 point to solid computational throughput for both business and scientific applications.

The Intel Core 5 130UL, based on its specification profile, appears positioned for a different role. With 10 cores and 12 threads, it has more physical cores than the AMD part, but its base clock of 1.60 GHz is lower, and its TDP of 15 W indicates a power-conscious design. The database records no benchmark wins for either processor in head-to-head testing, and the wins counters show zero for both sides. This means the Intel part cannot claim any measured advantage in the recorded data.

The use-case split therefore emerges from the available measurements. The AMD part demonstrates verified performance across a range of workloads, from compression to encryption to math operations. The Intel part offers a larger core count and a shared 12 MB L3 cache, which could theoretically benefit heavily threaded tasks, but no benchmark data confirms this. The Intel part also supports DDR4 memory alongside DDR5, which may matter for system flexibility, while the AMD part supports ECC memory, which matters for data integrity in professional environments.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 uses Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm process from TSMC, with the codename Gorgon Point. It belongs to the Ryzen AI PRO 400 generation, which combines Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. The Intel Core 5 130UL uses Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm process from Intel, with the codename Raptor Lake-PS. It belongs to the Core 5 generation under the Raptor Lake-PS family.

Core and thread counts differ. The AMD part has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel part has 10 cores and 12 threads. The Intel part achieves the same thread count with more physical cores, which implies a hybrid or efficiency-oriented design. The AMD part relies on simultaneous multithreading to double its core count into 12 threads.

Clock speeds differ in both directions. The AMD part has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. The Intel part has a base clock of 1.60 GHz and a higher boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The Intel part can reach a higher peak frequency but starts from a lower idle point.

Cache hierarchies diverge. The AMD part has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of L3 cache. The Intel part has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part has three times the L3 capacity, which can improve hit rates for working sets that fit in cache.

Memory support differs. The AMD part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with dual-channel configuration and a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel configuration, but no bandwidth figure is recorded. The AMD part supports ECC memory, while the Intel part does not.

PCIe connectivity differs. The AMD part provides Gen 4 with 14 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel part provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes from the CPU. The AMD part has more direct CPU-attached lanes for expansion devices.

Integrated graphics differ. The AMD part uses Radeon 840M, while the Intel part uses Iris Xe Graphics 80EU. Neither part has a recorded benchmark for graphics performance in the database.

Sockets and market segments differ. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP8 and targets the mobile segment. The Intel part uses Intel Socket 1700 and targets the desktop segment. The AMD part has a TDP of 28 W, while the Intel part has a TDP of 15 W.

Production status is active for both. The AMD part was released on 2026-01-04 and carries the part number 100-000001788. The Intel part was released on 2024-04-07 and has an unknown part number. Neither part has a recorded launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-thread benchmark score?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 has a recorded multi-thread score in the database: 19091. The Intel Core 5 130UL has no benchmark scores recorded.

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core 5 130UL has 10 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 5 130UL has a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, which is higher than the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 boost clock of 4.50 GHz.

Q: Does the Intel Core 5 130UL support ECC memory?

A: No. The database records ECC memory support as false for the Intel Core 5 130UL. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 records ECC memory support as true.

Q: What is the L3 cache size for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 has 4 MB of L3 cache. The Intel Core 5 130UL has 12 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor has a higher percentile ranking among all CPUs?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 ranks in the 86th percentile, while the Intel Core 5 130UL ranks in the 50th percentile.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear conclusion: the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 is the only one of the two with measured performance, and that measured performance places it well above the median CPU. Its 86th percentile ranking, multi-thread score of 19091, and single-thread score of 3757 give it a verified profile for general computing, multi-threaded workloads, and single-threaded responsiveness. Its nearest rivals, including the Intel Core i5-13600K and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, are all within 0.4 percent of its average score, which confirms that it competes with established desktop and mobile processors despite being a mobile part.

The Intel Core 5 130UL has no recorded benchmarks, so the database cannot verify its performance claims. Its 50th percentile ranking places it at the median, but this is a positional figure, not a measured score. Its higher boost clock of 4.70 GHz and larger 12 MB L3 cache suggest some potential advantages, but the absence of data means those advantages remain speculative.

For a user selecting between these two based on recorded evidence, the AMD part is the safer choice. It has verified scores across ten different workloads, a high percentile ranking, and a competitive position against well-known rivals. The Intel part offers more cores, a lower TDP of 15 W, and DDR4 support, but none of those features are backed by benchmark results in the database. The AMD part also supports ECC memory and has more PCIe lanes, which are concrete specification advantages for certain use cases.

The Intel part may appeal to a user who prioritizes core count and lower power draw, but the lack of measured data prevents any quantitative confirmation of its performance. The AMD part delivers the only recorded evidence of real-world capability, and that evidence is strong.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 | Intel Core 5 130UL |

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

| Cores | 6 | 10 |

| Threads | 12 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 2.00 GHz | 1.60 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.50 GHz | 4.70 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Raptor Lake |

| Codename | Gorgon Point | Raptor Lake-PS |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

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

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

| L3 Cache | 4 MB | 12 MB (shared) |

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

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | Not recorded |

| ECC Memory | True | False |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 14 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 8 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 840M | Iris Xe Graphics 80EU |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2026-01-04 | 2024-04-07 |

| Part Number | 100-000001788 | unknown |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | Not recorded |

| Multiplier Unlocked | False | False |