AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225H Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data shows a completely one-sided benchmark comparison. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225H wins all 11 head-to-head tests, with the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 recording zero wins in the shared PassMark suite. The Intel processor’s advantages range from modest single-thread margins to very large gaps in specific workloads, so the practical outcome depends on which tasks dominate a given workload mix.

The AMD processor still holds a higher overall percentile ranking at 86 versus Intel’s 82, which reflects its average benchmark score of 37762 compared to Intel’s 31508. That ranking comes from the full database of CPUs, but the direct head-to-head tests favor Intel consistently. The average score gap between the two is 18.6% in favor of Intel, yet the AMD chip sits higher in the global percentile distribution, indicating that the Intel part’s nearest rivals in the database have similar average scores.

For use-case segmentation, the Intel Core Ultra 5 225H is the clear choice for multi-threaded workloads. The PassMark multithread score of 28119 versus 19091 shows a 32.1% advantage. That margin extends to physics simulation, where Intel scores 1877 against AMD’s 995, a 47% lead. Integer math also favors Intel at 68520 versus 60879, an 11.2% gap, though this is the smallest multi-threaded margin besides single-thread performance.

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 does not win any single test, but its strengths are relative rather than absolute. Its single-thread score of 3757 trails Intel’s 4258 by only 11.8%, and its integer math deficit is just 11.2%. In workloads that are not heavily parallelized, the AMD part remains competitive despite the overall Intel sweep. The data compression gap is 17.9%, and random string sorting shows a 25.9% deficit, so neither processor dominates in every memory-bound task, but Intel still leads.

For floating-point math, the Intel advantage is substantial: 86540 versus 41114, a 52.5% lead. That suggests the Intel part is better suited to scientific or financial workloads that rely on floating-point throughput. Encryption shows the largest gap at 47.4%, with Intel scoring 21428 against AMD’s 11267. Prime number finding is even more lopsided at 74.1%, with Intel scoring 220 versus AMD’s 57, indicating a major difference in integer-heavy iterative workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-thread benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225H scores 4258 in PassMark single-thread, while the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 scores 3757. The Intel part leads by 11.8%.

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

A: The largest gap is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Intel Core Ultra 5 225H scores 220 versus AMD’s 57, a 74.1% advantage for Intel.

Q: How do the two processors compare in multi-threaded performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225H scores 28119 in PassMark multithread, while the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 scores 19091. Intel leads by 32.1%. In Cinebench R23 multicore, Intel scores 14629.5, though the AMD part has no recorded Cinebench result in the database.

Q: Which processor has a higher global percentile ranking?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 ranks in the 86th percentile among all CPUs, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225H ranks in the 82nd percentile.

Q: Does the AMD processor win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. Across the 11 shared PassMark tests, the Intel Core Ultra 5 225H wins all of them, and the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 records zero wins.

Q: What is the difference in average benchmark scores?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 has an average benchmark score of 37762, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225H has an average of 31508. Despite this, the Intel part wins every direct comparison.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is unambiguous: Intel wins every test, but the margins vary widely by workload type. The smallest advantage is in integer math, where Intel scores 68520 versus AMD’s 60879, a delta of 11.2%. Single-thread performance follows closely, with Intel at 4258 versus AMD’s 3757, an 11.8% lead. These two tests show that the Intel part’s per-core efficiency is only moderately better than AMD’s in scalar integer tasks.

The middle tier of results includes data compression, where Intel scores 283451 against AMD’s 232803, a 17.9% advantage. Random string sorting shows Intel at 33654 versus AMD’s 24936, a 25.9% gap. Extended instructions favor Intel at 21915 versus 16724, a 23.7% margin. These tests involve memory access patterns and instruction-level parallelism, and Intel consistently outperforms by roughly a fifth to a quarter.

The largest single-threaded-style gap is in floating-point math, where Intel scores 86540 versus AMD’s 41114, a 52.5% lead. This suggests the Intel architecture handles floating-point operations with significantly more throughput per clock or better vector utilization. Physics simulation follows with Intel at 1877 versus AMD’s 995, a 47% margin, which aligns with the floating-point gap since physics engines rely heavily on FPU throughput.

Encryption shows Intel at 21428 versus AMD’s 11267, a 47.4% lead, indicating stronger cryptographic instruction support or higher throughput in those specific operations. Prime number finding is the most extreme difference: Intel scores 220 versus AMD’s 57, a 74.1% advantage. This test is highly sensitive to integer division and branch prediction, and the Intel part’s design clearly handles it far better.

The multithread test reflects the overall parallel workload picture: Intel scores 28119 versus AMD’s 19091, a 32.1% lead. That margin is larger than the core count ratio alone would suggest, since Intel has 14 cores versus AMD’s 6, but the per-core performance advantage also contributes. The Intel part’s 14 threads versus AMD’s 12 threads (14 cores with 14 threads, 6 cores with 12 threads) does not fully explain the 32.1% gap, so architectural efficiency plays a role.

In Cinebench tests, which are not present for the AMD part, Intel scores 14629.5 in R23 multicore and 1969 in R23 single-core. These standalone figures cannot be directly compared to AMD without corresponding AMD data, but they provide context for Intel’s absolute performance level.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ substantially in core and thread counts. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225H has 14 cores and 14 threads. The Intel part uses a single-thread-per-core design in this configuration, whereas AMD uses simultaneous multithreading to reach 12 threads from 6 cores.

Base clock speeds differ: AMD’s base clock is 2.00 GHz, while Intel’s is 1.70 GHz. Boost clocks also differ, with AMD reaching 4.50 GHz and Intel reaching 4.90 GHz. Both processors have a 28 W TDP, matching in power envelope.

Cache configurations diverge significantly. AMD has 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 4 MB L3 total. Intel has 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB shared L3. Intel’s larger L3 cache, combined with more cores, explains part of its performance advantage in multi-threaded and cache-sensitive workloads.

Memory support is similar: both support DDR5 and LPDDR5X with dual-channel memory buses. However, memory bandwidth differs, with AMD rated at 89.6 GB/s and Intel at 102.4 GB/s. Intel’s higher bandwidth supports its larger core count and cache hierarchy.

ECC memory support is another differentiator. AMD supports ECC memory, while Intel does not. PCIe capabilities also differ: AMD uses Gen 4 with 14 lanes (CPU only), while Intel uses Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only). Intel’s newer PCIe generation offers higher per-lane bandwidth, but fewer lanes.

The integrated graphics differ as well. AMD uses Radeon 840M, while Intel uses Arc Graphics 130T. No benchmark data for these GPUs is included in the database, so the comparison is limited to specification differences.

Sockets and production details also differ. AMD uses AMD Socket FP8, while Intel uses Intel BGA 2049. The AMD part is part of the Ryzen AI PRO 400 generation (Zen 5 / Zen 5c), while Intel is from Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake-H). Neither processor has a launch MSRP recorded in the database.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 uses Zen 5 architecture with the codename Gorgon Point, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225H uses Arrow Lake architecture with the codename Arrow Lake-H. AMD’s generation is listed as Ryzen AI PRO 400 (Zen 5 / Zen 5c), which indicates a hybrid core design with both Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. Intel’s generation is Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake-H), which also uses a hybrid core layout, though the exact core types are not detailed in the database.

Process nodes differ: AMD is manufactured on a 4 nm process, while Intel uses a 3 nm process. Both are fabricated by TSMC, according to the database. The smaller node for Intel may contribute to its higher boost clock of 4.90 GHz versus AMD’s 4.50 GHz, though other factors such as cache design and core count also play roles.

AMD’s cache structure is per-core: 80 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 per core, with a small 4 MB shared L3. Intel’s cache is also per-core for L1 and L2 (192 KB L1 and 3 MB L2 per core), but its L3 is 18 MB shared across all cores. The larger shared cache, combined with more cores, gives Intel an advantage in workloads that reuse data across threads. AMD’s smaller L3 may limit multi-threaded scaling in cache-heavy tasks.

The hybrid core design differs in thread support. AMD has 6 cores and 12 threads, meaning each core supports two threads via SMT. Intel has 14 cores and 14 threads, meaning each core supports one thread. Despite having more cores, Intel’s thread count is only 2 higher than AMD’s, which means AMD’s SMT partially compensates for its lower core count.

Memory bandwidth differences align with the cache differences. Intel’s 102.4 GB/s bandwidth is 14.3% higher than AMD’s 89.6 GB/s. This supports Intel’s larger L3 cache and more cores. ECC support is exclusive to AMD, which may matter for specific professional or server-adjacent workloads, though the database does not include ECC-specific benchmarks.

PCIe differences are notable: AMD offers 14 Gen 4 lanes, while Intel offers 8 Gen 5 lanes. Gen 5 doubles the per-lane bandwidth, so Intel’s 8 lanes could match or exceed AMD’s 14 Gen 4 lanes in total bandwidth, but the lane count difference affects how many devices can be connected simultaneously. The integrated GPU differs as well, with AMD using Radeon 840M and Intel using Arc Graphics 130T, though no GPU benchmarks are recorded.

The Verdict

The benchmark data strongly favors the Intel Core Ultra 5 225H for virtually all compute workloads. Across the 11 shared tests, Intel wins every one, with advantages ranging from 11.2% in integer math to 74.1% in prime number finding. The multithread score of 28119 versus 19091 shows a 32.1% lead, and the floating-point score of 86540 versus 41114 shows a 52.5% lead. Any user prioritizing raw CPU performance in PassMark-style workloads should select the Intel part.

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 is not without merit, however. Its global percentile ranking of 86 versus Intel’s 82 indicates that, across the entire database of CPUs, the AMD part performs better relative to all other processors. Its average benchmark score of 37762 is also higher than Intel’s 31508. This suggests that the AMD part may excel in workloads not covered by the shared PassMark tests, such as the Cinebench suite, which has no AMD results recorded. The database does not show any AMD Cinebench scores, so those workloads cannot be directly compared.

For users who need ECC memory support, the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 is the only option of the two, since Intel does not support ECC. The AMD part also has more PCIe lanes (14 Gen 4 versus 8 Gen 5), which may be relevant for systems with multiple high-speed devices, though Intel’s Gen 5 support offers higher per-lane bandwidth.

The power envelope is identical at 28 W TDP, so neither processor has a thermal or power-delivery advantage. The Intel part achieves its higher performance within the same power budget, which indicates better performance-per-watt in the tested workloads. The AMD part’s lower boost clock of 4.50 GHz versus Intel’s 4.90 GHz, combined with fewer cores, explains much of the performance gap.

In summary, the Intel Core Ultra 5 225H is the superior choice for multi-threaded, floating-point, and encryption-heavy workloads. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 remains viable for users requiring ECC memory or a higher global percentile ranking, but the direct head-to-head data shows no workload where AMD wins. The database records 11 wins for Intel and 0 wins for AMD, making the recommendation straightforward for compute performance.