AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 has 10 cores and 10 threads, while the AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel part uses a higher physical core count without hyperthreading, whereas AMD relies on simultaneous multithreading to reach 12 threads from 6 cores.

Q: How do the two compare in average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 records an average benchmark score of 36938, placing it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 records 29461, placing it in the 81st percentile. The Intel part sits near the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F (36945) and AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D (37018), while the AMD part is close to the AMD Ryzen 7 3800X (29447) and Intel Core i5-13500HX (29270).

Q: What is the largest single benchmark win for the Intel Core Ultra 5 225?

A: The largest margin is in PassMark find prime numbers, where Intel scores 358 versus AMD's 62, a delta of -82.7% from AMD's perspective. This indicates a massive advantage in prime-number computation workloads.

Q: What is the smallest margin between the two processors?

A: The smallest gap appears in PassMark integer math, where Intel scores 65345 versus AMD's 63475, a delta of only -2.9%. This workload shows near parity between the two.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock and what is the difference?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 has a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 boosts to 4.60 GHz. Intel leads by 0.30 GHz on the boost side.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two chips?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 uses a 3 nm process, also at TSMC. The Intel part also has a listed transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm², figures that are not provided for the AMD part.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 belongs to the Ryzen AI 300 generation, codenamed Krackan Point, and uses a hybrid Zen 5 / Zen 5c core arrangement. It has 6 cores and 12 threads, with 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of L3 cache. The chip runs on a 4 nm TSMC process and fits the AMD Socket FP8, which targets mobile platforms. Its integrated graphics is the Radeon 840M, and it supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory over a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. PCIe connectivity is Gen 4 with 14 lanes from the CPU.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 comes from the Core Ultra Series 2, codenamed Arrow Lake-S, and uses the Arrow Lake architecture. It has 10 cores and 10 threads, with 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. It is manufactured on a 3 nm TSMC process with 17,800 million transistors and a 243 mm² die. The socket is Intel Socket 1851, and the part is a desktop chip. Its integrated graphics is the Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 16EU, and it supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. PCIe connectivity is Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU.

The core-count difference is structural: Intel uses 10 physical cores without hyperthreading, while AMD uses 6 physical cores with 12 threads. The cache layout also diverges sharply. Intel allocates 20 MB of shared L3, whereas AMD provides only 4 MB of L3, though AMD's per-core L1 and L2 are smaller than Intel's per-core allocations. Process node advantage goes to Intel at 3 nm versus AMD's 4 nm, and the Intel part also carries a higher memory bandwidth figure (102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s). The AMD chip's mobile orientation shows in its 28 W TDP, while the Intel desktop part draws 65 W.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 wins all 15 recorded head-to-head benchmarks. The most striking margin is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where Intel scores 25891 against AMD's 11461, a delta of -55.7%. That is more than double the AMD part's multi-core rendering output. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, Intel leads 2609 to 1712, a -34.4% delta. Single-core performance also favors Intel decisively: Cinebench R23 single-core shows Intel at 3655 versus AMD's 1818, a -50.3% delta, and Cinebench R15 single-core shows 368 versus 271, a -26.4% delta.

PassMark workloads reveal a pattern of Intel dominance in mathematically intensive tasks. Floating point math: Intel 92038, AMD 42621, delta -53.7%. Physics: Intel 2342, AMD 1089, delta -53.5%. Extended instructions: Intel 27162, AMD 17003, delta -37.4%. Data encryption: Intel 22285, AMD 11814, delta -47%. Data compression: Intel 302811, AMD 237484, delta -21.6%. Random string sorting: Intel 36590, AMD 25435, delta -30.5%. Multi-threaded PassMark: Intel 30459, AMD 19927, delta -34.6%. Single-thread PassMark: Intel 4412, AMD 3875, delta -12.2%.

The closest contest is PassMark integer math, where Intel's 65345 barely edges AMD's 63475, a delta of -2.9%. That near-tie suggests the AMD part's integer execution units are competitive with Intel's, but the gap widens substantially in floating-point and SIMD-heavy tests. The smallest single-core gap is also in PassMark single-thread (and its duplicate singlethread entry), where Intel leads by 12.2%. Prime-number finding shows the most extreme divergence: Intel 358, AMD 62, delta -82.7%, indicating a fundamental difference in how the two chips handle that specific workload.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 | Intel Core Ultra 5 225 |

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

| Cores | 6 | 10 |

| Threads | 12 | 10 |

| Base clock | 2.00 GHz | 3.30 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.60 GHz | 4.90 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Codename | Krackan Point | Arrow Lake-S |

| Generation | Ryzen AI 300 (Zen 5 / Zen 5c) | Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake) |

| Process node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Transistors | Not listed | 17,800 million |

| Die size | Not listed | 243 mm² |

| L1 cache | 80 KB per core | 192 KB per core |

| L2 cache | 1 MB per core | 3 MB per core |

| L3 cache | 4 MB | 20 MB shared |

| Memory support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR5 |

| Memory bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 14 lanes | Gen 5, 20 lanes |

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

| Market segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Launch MSRP | None listed | $246 |

The Intel part carries a higher base clock (3.30 GHz versus 2.00 GHz) and a higher boost clock (4.90 GHz versus 4.60 GHz). Its L3 cache is 5 times larger (20 MB versus 4 MB), and its per-core L1 and L2 allocations are about 2.4x and 3x larger respectively. The Intel chip also supports PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes, while AMD uses Gen 4 with 14 lanes.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 outperforms the AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 in every recorded test. The average benchmark score difference is 36938 versus 29461, a margin that places Intel in the 85th percentile and AMD in the 81st percentile. Intel's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F (36945) and AMD Ryzen 5 5500X3D (37018), while AMD's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 3800X (29447) and Intel Core i5-13500HX (29270). These rival positions confirm that the Intel part competes in a higher performance class.

The Intel part's wins are not narrow. In multi-core rendering, it more than doubles the AMD chip's Cinebench R23 score. In single-core rendering, it leads by roughly half. In floating-point math and physics, it leads by over half. Even in the closest test, integer math, Intel still wins. The only workload where AMD approaches parity is integer math, where the delta shrinks to -2.9%.

However, the market segments differ fundamentally. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 is a mobile part with a 28 W TDP, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 is a desktop part with a 65 W TDP. The power envelope difference is 37 W, which explains much of the performance gap. The AMD chip targets thin-and-light laptops where thermal limits are tight, and its 4 nm process and dual memory support (DDR5 and LPDDR5X) reflect that purpose. The Intel chip targets desktop towers with more cooling headroom, and its 3 nm process, larger cache, and higher memory bandwidth support that role.

The data suggests the Intel part is the stronger processor in absolute terms. But the comparison is not apples-to-apples: one is designed for mobile, the other for desktop. A user comparing these two must weigh the platform difference as much as the raw numbers, because the AMD chip cannot be installed in a desktop Socket 1851 board, and the Intel chip cannot be installed in an AMD Socket FP8 laptop.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 wins in every measured category. Multi-core rendering is its strongest area: Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a 55.7% lead, and Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a 34.4% lead. PassMark multi-thread also favors Intel by 34.6%. For workloads like video encoding, 3D rendering, and compilation, the Intel part delivers substantially higher throughput.

Single-core performance also goes to Intel, with Cinebench R23 single-core leading by 50.3% and Cinebench R15 single-core by 26.4%. PassMark single-thread shows a 12.2% lead. This translates to faster responsiveness in lightly threaded applications such as web browsing, office work, and legacy software.

Mathematical workloads heavily favor Intel. Floating point math (53.7% lead), extended instructions (37.4% lead), and data encryption (47% lead) all show Intel dominance. The prime-number test shows the largest gap at 82.7%. Data compression (21.6% lead) and random string sorting (30.5% lead) also favor Intel.

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 has no recorded benchmark wins. Its closest performance is in PassMark integer math, where it trails by only 2.9%, indicating that integer-heavy tasks such as certain database operations or integer sorting may see only a small penalty versus the Intel part. The AMD chip's advantage lies outside the raw compute benchmarks: it uses 28 W versus 65 W, which suggests far lower power consumption in a mobile chassis. Its support for LPDDR5X memory also fits low-power mobile designs. The AMD part's mobile socket and lower TDP make it the only choice for thin laptops, while the Intel part's desktop socket and higher power draw make it the only choice for desktop builds. In the recorded data, the Intel part wins all 15 benchmarks, but the AMD part addresses a different physical use case.