AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225T Comparison

AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 and Intel Core Ultra 5 225T occupy different corners of the processor market, one a mobile part and the other a desktop chip. The head-to-head benchmark data shows a clear split: Intel wins nine of the eleven recorded tests, while AMD takes two. However, the margins and the nature of those wins reveal distinct performance personalities. The Intel part is not merely faster; it is substantially faster in several compute-heavy workloads, while the AMD chip demonstrates specific strengths that matter for certain tasks.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most lopsided result in the comparison is in the prime number finding test. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T scores 284 against the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440's 77, a delta of 72.9% in Intel's favor. This is an enormous gap that points to fundamental differences in how the two architectures handle integer-heavy, branch-intensive loops. Similarly, floating-point math shows a major Intel advantage: 82751 versus 42934, a 48.1% deficit for AMD. This suggests the Intel part's execution resources are significantly more capable for scientific and engineering calculations.

The physics simulation benchmark follows the same pattern. Intel scores 2053, AMD scores 1119, leaving AMD 45.5% behind. These three tests (prime numbers, floating-point, physics) are all classic indicators of raw computational throughput, and the data shows Intel holding a commanding lead. The multithreaded PassMark score also goes to Intel at 25358 versus 21054, a 17% margin, which is impressive given that the AMD chip has 12 threads against Intel's 10. Single-thread performance also favors Intel: 4348 versus 3785, a 12.9% difference. This is notable because single-thread speed is critical for legacy applications and lightly threaded workloads.

Data encryption is another Intel win, 18289 versus 12418, a 32.1% gap. This workload often relies on dedicated instruction sets, and the results indicate Intel's implementation is more effective. Extended instructions go to Intel as well, 20083 versus 18456, an 8.1% difference. Even random string sorting, a memory-latency-sensitive test, favors Intel: 28774 versus 27252, a 5.3% margin. The Intel part wins in nearly every category that stresses throughput or instruction efficiency.

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 does strike back in two areas. Data compression is an AMD win at 256420 versus 233998, a 9.6% advantage. Integer math is the other AMD victory: 65991 versus 59543, a 10.8% margin. These wins are not trivial; they show that AMD's Zen 5 architecture retains a real edge in specific integer-heavy, data-manipulation tasks. The compression result is particularly interesting because it often depends on large cache structures and efficient branch prediction, areas where AMD clearly excels.

Where Each One Wins

The use-case split is fairly clean based on the recorded data. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T is the choice for any workload that leans on floating-point arithmetic, physics simulation, encryption, or general multithreaded throughput. Its performance in prime number calculation is so dominant that it suggests a strong showing in mathematical modeling, financial analytics, and scientific computing. The single-thread advantage also makes it suitable for older software that cannot use many cores, as well as for responsive day-to-day desktop use where clock speed per core matters more than core count.

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 wins in data compression and integer math. These are relevant for database operations, file archiving, and some types of data processing pipelines. The compression score, in particular, is a strong indicator for workloads that handle large volumes of text or structured data. Its 12 threads versus Intel's 10 provide more parallelism for heavily threaded integer tasks, and the data shows this translates into a measurable advantage in those specific tests.

The overall average benchmark score tells a different story, however. The AMD part has an average score of 41208 across all its benchmarks, placing it in the 87th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel part has an average score of 30468, placing it in the 82nd percentile. This is a curious inversion: Intel wins the head-to-head tests but has a lower average score. This is because the AMD chip's benchmark suite includes its PassMark results, which are generally high, while Intel's average is dragged down by its Cinebench results, which are lower than its PassMark scores. The average score is not a direct comparison of the same tests, so the head-to-head results are the more reliable guide.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different designs. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 uses a Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, with a die size of 195 mm². It has 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. Its cache layout is 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of L3 cache. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T uses the Arrow Lake architecture on a 3 nm TSMC process, with a die size of 243 mm² and 17,800 million transistors. It has 10 cores and 10 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. Its cache is larger: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache.

The Intel chip's larger cache hierarchy is a likely contributor to its wins in physics and random string sorting, which are sensitive to memory access patterns. The AMD chip's smaller L3 cache is offset by its higher core count and simultaneous multithreading, which helps in integer math and compression. The process node difference (4 nm versus 3 nm) does not directly show up in benchmark scores, but the transistor count and die size differences indicate a more complex Intel design. The Intel part has a 65 W TDP, while the AMD part has a 28 W TDP, reflecting their respective desktop and mobile market segments.

Memory support differs as well. The AMD chip supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with dual-channel memory and a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel chip supports only DDR5 with dual-channel memory and a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The Intel part also supports ECC memory? No, the data shows AMD supports ECC memory while Intel does not. PCIe connectivity is also different: AMD uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes, Intel uses Gen 5 with 20 lanes. Integrated graphics are the Radeon 840M for AMD and Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 16EU for Intel.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-thread score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T has a single-thread score of 4348, which is 12.9% higher than the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440's score of 3785.

Q: How does the AMD chip perform in data compression?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 scores 256420 in data compression, which is 9.6% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T's score of 233998.

Q: What is the core and thread count difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T has 10 cores and 10 threads.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T has 20 MB of shared L3 cache, while the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 has 8 MB of L3 cache.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 has an average benchmark score of 41208, placing it in the 87th percentile. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T has an average score of 30468, placing it in the 82nd percentile.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T does not support ECC memory.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split in intended use. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T is the stronger processor for general desktop computing, scientific simulations, encryption, and any workload that benefits from high floating-point throughput or high single-thread performance. Its wins in physics (45.5% ahead), floating-point math (48.1% ahead), and prime number finding (72.9% ahead) are decisive. It also leads in multithreaded performance despite having fewer threads, which indicates superior per-core efficiency.

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 is the better choice for data compression and integer-heavy tasks. Its wins in those two categories are meaningful, and its 12 threads provide additional parallelism that some workloads can exploit. However, its losses in the other nine tests are often by large margins, and its lower TDP of 28 W suggests it is designed for mobile systems where power efficiency is more important than peak performance.

For a desktop user who needs raw compute power, the Intel part is the clear winner based on the head-to-head results. For a mobile user who prioritizes data manipulation and compression, the AMD part has a specific niche. The average benchmark scores are misleading here because they do not compare the same tests, so the head-to-head data is the only reliable basis for a decision.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 | Intel Core Ultra 5 225T |

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

| Cores | 6 | 10 |

| Threads | 12 | 10 |

| Base Clock | 2.00 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.80 GHz | 4.90 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Arrow Lake |

| Codename | Gorgon Point | Arrow Lake-S |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Transistors | Not listed | 17,800 million |

| Die Size | 195 mm² | 243 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

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

| Memory Support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 Lanes | Gen 5, 20 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 840M | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 16EU |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2026-01-04 | 2024-12-31 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | No |