AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 235 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear split between these two processors. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 wins 3 of the 15 recorded head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 wins 12. The average benchmark score for the AMD part is 37,093, placing it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel part averages 46,062, which lands it in the 89th percentile.

The AMD processor's largest victory comes in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where it scores 2,457 against Intel's 1,488. That is a 65.1% advantage, the single biggest margin in either direction across all tests. The AMD chip also wins Cinebench R23 multi-core, scoring 16,054 versus 14,769, a more modest 8.7% lead. In Cinebench R15 single-core, AMD takes a narrow 4.8% win, scoring 220 to Intel's 210.

Intel's wins are numerous and often substantial. The largest margin is in PassMark find prime numbers, where Intel scores 371 against AMD's 84, a 77.4% delta. Floating point math shows a 55.1% gap, with Intel at 117,951 and AMD at 52,971. Data encryption favors Intel by 49%, with scores of 29,293 and 14,925. Physics tests show a 48% delta, with Intel at 2,570 and AMD at 1,337. Extended instructions favor Intel by 36.6%, at 32,752 versus 20,778. The multi-threaded PassMark score goes to Intel by 34.5%, 37,816 versus 24,779. Random string sorting shows a 34% gap, and data compression shows a 24.7% gap, both in Intel's favor.

The closest contest is PassMark integer math, where Intel scores 87,948 and AMD scores 86,227, a difference of only 2%. Cinebench R23 single-core is also close: Intel scores 2,085 to AMD's 2,010, a 3.6% edge. The single-thread PassMark test shows Intel ahead by 12.4%, at 4,516 versus 3,955. Two different test entries for single-threaded performance (passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread) both record identical scores for each chip, confirming the same 12.4% delta.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm process from TSMC, under the Gorgon Point codename. It belongs to the Ryzen AI PRO 400 generation, which combines Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. The chip has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. Its thermal design power is 28 watts.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 uses the Arrow Lake architecture on a 3 nm process, also from TSMC. It is part of the Core Ultra Series 2 and the Ultra 5 generation, under the Arrow Lake-S codename. This chip has 14 cores and 14 threads, with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. Its thermal design power is 65 watts.

The cache structures differ significantly. AMD provides 80 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, with 8 MB of L3. Intel provides 192 KB of L1 per core and 3 MB of L2 per core, with a larger 24 MB shared L3. The die sizes also differ: AMD measures 195 mm², while Intel measures 243 mm². Intel lists 17,800 million transistors; AMD does not report a transistor count.

Memory support shows differences as well. AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while Intel supports DDR5 only. Both use dual-channel memory buses. AMD's memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s, while Intel's is 102.4 GB/s. AMD supports ECC memory; Intel does not. PCIe connectivity differs: AMD uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while Intel uses Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU.

Integrated graphics differ: AMD uses the Radeon 860M, while Intel uses the Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 24EU. The socket and market segment also differ. AMD uses Socket FP8 and targets mobile, while Intel uses Socket 1851 and targets desktop.

Where Each One Wins

The data shows a clear use-case split. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 wins in Cinebench multi-core tests, which suggests it handles heavily threaded rendering workloads well. Its 65.1% lead in Cinebench R15 multi-core and 8.7% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core indicate strength in CPU-bound rendering tasks.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 wins in nearly every other category. Its 77.4% advantage in prime number finding and 55.1% lead in floating point math point to strong arithmetic throughput. The 49% edge in data encryption and 48% lead in physics tests reinforce this pattern. The 36.6% margin in extended instructions and 34.5% lead in multi-threaded PassMark show broad computational advantages.

For single-threaded work, Intel holds the edge in both Cinebench R23 (3.6%) and PassMark single-thread (12.4%). The AMD chip does win Cinebench R15 single-core by 4.8%, but Intel wins the more recent Cinebench R23 single-core test. Data compression, random string sorting, and integer math all favor Intel, with the integer math margin being slim at 2%.

The overall pattern indicates that AMD's advantage is concentrated in Cinebench multi-core workloads, while Intel dominates general computing tasks. The Intel chip also holds a higher average benchmark score (46,062 versus 37,093) and a higher percentile ranking (89th versus 85th).

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 has an average benchmark score of 46,062, while the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 averages 37,093. Intel sits in the 89th percentile of all CPUs; AMD sits in the 85th.

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

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 has 14 cores and 14 threads, meaning it has more cores but no hyperthreading.

Q: Which chip wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 wins with a score of 16,054, compared to Intel's 14,769. That is an 8.7% advantage for AMD.

Q: What is the largest single benchmark margin between the two?

A: The largest margin is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 scores 371 and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 scores 84. Intel leads by 77.4%.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 does not.

Q: What are the process nodes for each chip?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 uses a 4 nm process, and the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 uses a 3 nm process. Both are manufactured by TSMC.

The Verdict

The data supports different selections depending on the workload. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 is the stronger choice for Cinebench multi-core rendering, where it leads by 65.1% in R15 and 8.7% in R23. It also offers ECC memory support, LPDDR5X memory compatibility, and a substantially lower thermal design power of 28 watts versus Intel's 65 watts. Its mobile socket and lower power profile suggest it is designed for portable systems.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 is the stronger choice for general computation. It wins 12 of 15 head-to-head tests, with particularly large leads in prime number finding, floating point math, encryption, physics, and extended instructions. Its 14 cores, larger 24 MB L3 cache, Gen 5 PCIe with 20 lanes, and higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s all support this broader performance edge. Its higher average benchmark score and percentile ranking confirm its overall standing.

The nearest rivals in the database provide context. The AMD chip's closest competitors include the Intel Core i9-12900T at 0.1% higher average score, the AMD Ryzen 7 160 at 0.1% higher, the Intel Core i7-13700 at 0.1% higher, and the AMD Ryzen 7 7735H at 0.2% higher. The Intel chip's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 at 0.1% higher, the Intel Core i9-13900HX at 0.1% lower, the AMD EPYC 4364P at 0.2% higher, and the AMD EPYC 7303 at 0.2% higher.

For users prioritizing Cinebench multi-core performance and power efficiency, the AMD part is the measured leader. For users prioritizing everything else, the Intel part is the clear winner according to the recorded data.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450 | Intel Core Ultra 5 235 |

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

| Cores | 8 | 14 |

| Threads | 16 | 14 |

| Base clock | 2.00 GHz | 3.40 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.10 GHz | 5.00 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 |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not reported | 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 | 24 MB shared |

| Memory support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR5 |

| Memory bus | Dual-channel | Dual-channel |

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

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon 860M | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 24EU |

| Market segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release date | 2026-01-04 | 2025-01-06 |

| Part number | 100-000001865 | SRQAS |