AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 vs Intel Core 5 211E Comparison

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 and Intel Core 5 211E occupy different corners of the processor market, yet their benchmark results show a surprisingly competitive overlap. The recorded data indicates a clear split in workload preferences, with the Intel part dominating most tests while the AMD chip claims decisive victories in specific computational tasks. This analysis relies exclusively on the database measurements to outline the performance, architectural, and specification differences between these two active processors.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core 5 211E claims 11 wins across the shared benchmark suite, while the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 secures 4 victories. The most dramatic difference appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where Intel scores 20389 against AMD's 14278.5, a 30% advantage. This is the largest single performance gap in the entire comparison. The single-core results follow a similar pattern, with Intel leading Cinebench R23 single-core by 32.1% (2878 vs 1954) and Cinebench R15 single-core by 14.5% (289 vs 247).

The Intel processor extends its lead across several PassMark workloads. Data compression shows Intel ahead by 18.7% (346757 vs 281834), and data encryption follows with a 19.4% margin (17938 vs 14462). Floating-point math delivers a 22.2% advantage for Intel (66402 vs 51639), while random string sorting favors Intel by 9.4% (34308 vs 31071). The extended instructions test shows a narrower gap at 7.6% (21592 vs 19955), and integer math is nearly even with Intel ahead by just 3.7% (88117 vs 84868). Single-thread performance in PassMark also favors Intel, though modestly, at 3.3% (4006 vs 3872).

The AMD processor's wins are concentrated in specific mathematical and physics-based tests. PassMark find prime numbers shows AMD with an 88.4% advantage (81 vs 43), the largest relative margin in either direction. PassMark physics similarly favors AMD by 87.7% (1318 vs 702). In Cinebench R15 multi-core, AMD leads by 13.7% (2336.5 vs 2055), which stands in sharp contrast to the newer R23 multi-core result. PassMark multithread is essentially a tie, with AMD ahead by only 0.7% (23994 vs 23833).

Interpreting these results, the Intel Core 5 211E delivers substantially stronger sustained multi-core rendering performance in Cinebench R23, and it also holds a consistent edge in memory-intensive and encryption workloads. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 counters with exceptional performance in prime number calculations and physics simulations, where its architecture appears better suited to those specific instruction patterns. The overall average benchmark score reflects this split, with Intel at 37829 and AMD at 35719, placing the Intel part at the 86th percentile of all CPUs and AMD at the 85th.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use fundamentally different design approaches. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 is built on the Zen 5 architecture with the Krackan Point codename, part of the Ryzen AI PRO 300 generation. It uses a 4 nm process from TSMC with a die size of 195 mm². The Intel Core 5 211E uses the Bartlett Lake codename from the Core 5 generation, fabricated on a 10 nm Intel process with a larger 257 mm² die.

Core configurations differ notably. The AMD chip packs 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel chip offers 10 cores and 16 threads. This means Intel provides more physical cores but the same thread count, suggesting a hybrid arrangement where some cores lack hyper-threading. Clock speeds show Intel starting higher at 2.70 GHz base versus AMD's 2.00 GHz, but AMD reaches a higher 5.00 GHz boost compared to Intel's 4.90 GHz.

Cache hierarchies reveal distinct strategies. AMD allocates 80 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, with 8 MB of L3 cache. Intel matches the 80 KB L1 per core figure but doubles L2 to 2 MB per core and provides 20 MB of shared L3, a substantial increase that helps explain the multi-core rendering advantage.

Memory support diverges significantly. AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, while Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5 with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth. Both use dual-channel memory buses and both support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity also differs, with AMD offering Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes and Intel offering Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics take different paths. AMD includes the Radeon 860M, while Intel ships UHD Graphics 730. The market segments differ as well, with AMD targeting mobile platforms via the FP8 socket and Intel targeting desktop platforms via Socket 1700. The AMD processor carries a 28 W TDP, while the Intel processor carries a 65 W TDP, reflecting their different intended usage scenarios. The AMD chip launched on January 5, 2025, and the Intel chip followed on January 12, 2025.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 reaches 5.00 GHz, which is 0.10 GHz higher than the Intel Core 5 211E's 4.90 GHz boost clock.

Q: How do the multi-core Cinebench scores compare?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E leads Cinebench R23 multi-core with 20389 versus AMD's 14278.5, a 30% advantage. However, in the older Cinebench R15 multi-core test, AMD leads with 2336.5 versus 2055, a 13.7% margin.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core 5 211E has 20 MB of shared L3 cache, while the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 has 8 MB of L3 cache.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The AMD chip supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel chip supports DDR4 and DDR5 with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth. Both support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor performs better in PassMark physics tests?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 scores 1318 in PassMark physics, which is 87.7% higher than the Intel Core 5 211E's score of 702.

Q: What is the thread count for each processor?

A: Both processors have 16 threads. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 achieves this with 8 cores, while the Intel Core 5 211E uses 10 cores to reach the same thread count.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to distinct usage profiles for each processor. The Intel Core 5 211E is the stronger choice for multi-core rendering workloads, as evidenced by its 30% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and its 32.1% single-core advantage in the same suite. Its larger 20 MB L3 cache and 10 physical cores provide a clear edge in content creation and encryption tasks, where the data compression and encryption scores favor Intel by roughly 19%.

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 is the better option for physics-based simulations and prime number calculations, where its leads of 87.7% and 88.4% respectively are decisive. Its lower 28 W TDP compared to Intel's 65 W TDP, combined with the mobile FP8 socket and LPDDR5X memory support, positions it for power-sensitive mobile designs. The Intel part, with its desktop Socket 1700 and 65 W TDP, targets stationary systems where power draw matters less.

For users prioritizing raw multi-threaded compute in rendering or scientific workloads, the Intel Core 5 211E delivers measurably higher performance. For those running physics engines, prime number algorithms, or needing lower power consumption in a mobile form factor, the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 holds the advantage. The average benchmark scores confirm this split, with Intel at 37829 and AMD at 35719, a difference of roughly 5.6% overall.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 | Intel Core 5 211E |

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

| Cores | 8 | 10 |

| Threads | 16 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.00 GHz | 2.70 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 4.90 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Codename | Krackan Point | Bartlett Lake |

| Generation | Ryzen AI PRO 300 (Zen 5 / Zen 5c) | Core 5 (Bartlett Lake) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die Size | 195 mm² | 257 mm² |

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

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

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

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 76.8 GB/s |

| PCIe Version | Gen 4 | Gen 5 |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 860M | UHD Graphics 730 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Launch Date | 2025-01-05 | 2025-01-12 |

| Launch MSRP | Not available | $221 |

The specification table shows a clear division of design priorities. AMD concentrates on a smaller 4 nm process, higher memory bandwidth, and lower power consumption for mobile use. Intel counters with more cores, more cache, newer PCIe support, and a desktop-oriented design. Both processors support ECC memory and lock their multipliers. The recorded data suggests neither processor is universally superior, but each excels in the domains its architecture targets.