AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 235 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data splits this comparison into two distinct profiles. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 wins 4 of the 15 head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 wins 11. However, the margin of victory matters more than the raw win count. The AMD part takes the multi-core crowns by wide margins, while Intel's wins are concentrated in specialized workloads.

The largest single gap is in Cinebench R15 multi-core. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 scores 2842 against Intel's 1488, a 91% advantage. That is nearly double the output in a classic rendering workload. Cinebench R15 single-core also favors AMD, with 303 versus 210, a 44.3% lead. These are the two biggest proportional wins in the entire comparison.

Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a smaller but still substantial AMD edge: 18698 versus 14769, or 26.6% ahead. The Ryzen AI 9 365 also takes PassMark integer math, scoring 101831 against 87948, a 15.8% win. That is the only PassMark test where AMD finishes ahead.

Intel's wins are broader but generally smaller in percentage terms. The largest Intel margin is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core Ultra 5 235 scores 371 versus 117, a 68.5% advantage. PassMark floating point math goes to Intel by 46.8% (117951 versus 62802). Data encryption shows a 37.5% Intel lead (29293 versus 18297). Physics tests favor Intel by 33.7% (2570 versus 1704). Extended instructions go Intel's way by 23.3% (32752 versus 25113). PassMark multi-thread gives Intel 37816 against 29467, a 22.1% lead.

The remaining Intel wins are narrower. Random string sorting favors Intel by 19.5% (48980 versus 39447). Single-thread PassMark goes to Intel by 14.9% (4516 versus 3841). Data compression shows Intel ahead by 9.3% (390711 versus 354510). Cinebench R23 single-core is the closest test: Intel scores 2085 versus AMD's 1992, a 4.5% margin.

The overall average benchmark score reflects this split. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 averages 46062 across all tests, placing it at the 89th percentile of all CPUs. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 averages 40048, at the 87th percentile. The database's nearest rival comparisons show the Intel part sitting alongside the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (0.1% apart) and the Intel Core i9-13900HX (0.1% apart). The AMD part sits near the AMD Ryzen 7 7700 (0.1% apart) and Intel Core 5 221E (0.2% apart).

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 uses the Zen 5 architecture on the Strix Point codename, built on a 4 nm TSMC process. It has 10 cores and 20 threads, meaning every core supports two threads via simultaneous multithreading. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 uses the Arrow Lake architecture on the Arrow Lake-S codename, built on a 3 nm TSMC process. It has 14 cores but only 14 threads, so Intel does not enable multithreading on this part.

Cache allocation differs sharply. AMD provides 80 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, with a 16 MB L3 cache. Intel provides 192 KB of L1 per core and 3 MB of L2 per core, with a shared 24 MB L3 cache. The larger per-core caches on Intel likely contribute to its single-thread and specialized workload advantages.

The process nodes also differ, with Intel at 3 nm versus AMD at 4 nm. Intel's die measures 243 mm² and contains 17,800 million transistors. AMD's die measures 233 mm², though transistor count is not recorded. Both use TSMC as the foundry.

Memory bandwidth favors Intel. The Core Ultra 5 235 supports DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and delivers 102.4 GB/s. The Ryzen AI 9 365 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, but delivers 89.6 GB/s. Intel's PCIe implementation is newer: Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only), versus AMD's Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only).

The integrated graphics differ substantially. AMD pairs the Ryzen AI 9 365 with the Radeon 880M. Intel uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 24EU. The database does not include graphics benchmark scores, so the comparison here is limited to architectural presence.

Socket and platform also diverge. AMD uses Socket FP8, a mobile socket, and the market segment is listed as Mobile. Intel uses Socket 1851, a desktop socket, and the market segment is Desktop. This explains the TDP difference: AMD lists 28 watts, Intel lists 65 watts. The release dates also differ, with AMD launching on 2024-06-30 and Intel on 2025-01-06.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 dominates multi-threaded rendering workloads. The 91% lead in Cinebench R15 multi-core and 26.6% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core indicate that applications heavily dependent on thread-level parallelism will run markedly faster on the AMD part. The 20 threads versus Intel's 14 threads likely explain this advantage. Integer math also favors AMD by 15.8%, suggesting that general integer-heavy code, such as some database and compilation workloads, may prefer the AMD processor.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 wins across a broader set of specialized tasks. Prime number finding shows a 68.5% lead, floating point math a 46.8% lead, and encryption a 37.5% lead. These are compute patterns that benefit from the larger L2 and L3 caches and the higher base clock of 3.40 GHz versus AMD's 2.00 GHz. Physics simulation favors Intel by 33.7%, and extended instruction sets by 23.3%. Multi-thread PassMark goes to Intel by 22.1%, which is notable because it measures a different mix of workloads than Cinebench.

The single-thread picture favors Intel in most tests. PassMark single-thread gives Intel a 14.9% lead (4516 versus 3841). Cinebench R23 single-core gives Intel a smaller 4.5% lead (2085 versus 1992). However, Cinebench R15 single-core goes to AMD by 44.3%, which is an outlier relative to the other single-thread results. The database records both PassMark single-thread and PassMark singlethread tests with identical scores on each processor, confirming consistency within that benchmark suite.

Data compression favors Intel by 9.3%, while random string sorting favors Intel by 19.5%. These results indicate Intel's advantage in memory-intensive data manipulation tasks, consistent with its larger cache hierarchy.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 has 14 cores but only 14 threads, while the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 has 10 cores and 20 threads. AMD enables simultaneous multithreading, Intel does not.

Q: Why does AMD win Cinebench multi-core by such a large margin?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 scores 2842 in Cinebench R15 multi-core versus Intel's 1488, a 91% lead. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, AMD scores 18698 versus 14769, a 26.6% lead. The 20 threads on AMD likely provide better scaling in this rendering workload.

Q: Where does Intel show its largest advantage?

A: Intel's biggest win is in PassMark find prime numbers, scoring 371 versus AMD's 117, a 68.5% lead. PassMark floating point math also heavily favors Intel at 117951 versus 62802, a 46.8% margin.

Q: Do the processors use the same manufacturing process?

A: No. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 uses a 3 nm TSMC process, while the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 uses a 4 nm TSMC process. Intel's die is 243 mm² with 17,800 million transistors; AMD's die is 233 mm² with no transistor count recorded.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: Intel delivers 102.4 GB/s with dual-channel DDR5 support. AMD delivers 89.6 GB/s with dual-channel DDR5 and LPDDR5X support. Intel also has PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes, while AMD has PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes.

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 averages 46062 across all recorded benchmarks, placing at the 89th percentile. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 averages 40048, placing at the 87th percentile.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split by workload class. For multi-threaded rendering and integer-heavy computation, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 is the stronger choice. Its Cinebench R15 multi-core score is 91% higher, and Cinebench R23 multi-core is 26.6% higher. Integer math also favors AMD by 15.8%. These are substantial, not marginal, differences.

For everything else in the recorded benchmarks, the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 leads. The 14.9% single-thread advantage in PassMark, the 46.8% floating point lead, the 37.5% encryption lead, and the 22.1% multi-thread PassMark lead collectively show a more versatile processor for mixed workloads. The higher base clock of 3.40 GHz versus 2.00 GHz and the larger caches likely drive these results.

The platform context matters. The AMD part targets mobile with a 28 watt TDP and Socket FP8. The Intel part targets desktop with a 65 watt TDP and Socket 1851. A buyer choosing a laptop processor would look at AMD; a desktop builder would look at Intel. The Intel part also carries a launch MSRP of $257, while AMD has no recorded launch price.

The overall average benchmark score favors Intel by roughly 15% (46062 versus 40048). The percentile ranking also favors Intel at 89 versus 87. However, the biggest single-test margin in the entire comparison belongs to AMD in Cinebench R15 multi-core. The verdict depends on whether the primary workload is rendering and multi-threaded integer tasks, where AMD wins decisively, or a broader mix including floating point, encryption, and single-threaded tasks, where Intel wins more consistently.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 | Intel Core Ultra 5 235 |

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

| Cores | 10 | 14 |

| Threads | 20 | 14 |

| Base Clock | 2.00 GHz | 3.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Arrow Lake |

| Codename | Strix Point | Arrow Lake-S |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Die Size | 233 mm² | 243 mm² |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 17,800 million |

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

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

| L3 Cache | 16 MB | 24 MB shared |

| Memory Support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR5 |

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

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

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 880M | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 24EU |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2024-06-30 | 2025-01-06 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $257 |

| Part Number | 100-000001530 | SRQAS |