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

The Verdict

The benchmark data splits this pairing into two distinct profiles. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 wins 5 of the 15 recorded head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 235T wins 10. The Intel part is the clear leader in single-threaded and floating-point workloads, often by wide margins. The AMD part counters with substantial wins in integer math, data compression, and extended instruction handling.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235T dominates in Cinebench R23 multi-core, scoring 26,232 against the AMD's 18,698, a 28.7% advantage. It also holds a 46.2% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core, with scores of 3,703 versus 1,992. For users running rendering, physics simulation, or heavily threaded productivity tasks, the data strongly favors the Intel chip.

The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 is the better choice for workloads that stress integer operations and data throughput. It leads in PassMark integer math by 20.9% (101,831 vs. 84,244) and in data compression by 20.1% (354,510 vs. 295,100). It also wins in random string sorting by 11.5% (39,447 vs. 35,377) and extended instructions by 8.2% (25,113 vs. 23,212). These results indicate a preference for database, archival, and cryptographic-adjacent tasks.

The overall average benchmark scores are close: the AMD part records 40,048 against the Intel's 38,561, placing both near the 86th to 87th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Intel part's nearest rival, the Intel Core i5-14500, scores 38,531, a 0.1% delta, while the AMD part's closest rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 7700, scores 40,081, a 0.1% delta. The verdict is workload-dependent. Pick the Intel Core Ultra 5 235T for single-thread speed and multi-core rendering. Pick the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 for integer-heavy data processing and compression tasks.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235T wins every single-thread test in the database. It leads in Cinebench R23 single-core by 46.2% (3,703 vs. 1,992) and in PassMark single-thread by 11.5% (4,339 vs. 3,841).

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235T wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core by 28.7% (26,232 vs. 18,698) and in PassMark multi-thread by 4.7% (30,918 vs. 29,467). The AMD part wins only in Cinebench R15 multi-core, by 7.5% (2,842 vs. 2,644).

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 has an average benchmark score of 40,048, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 235T scores 38,561. The AMD part sits at the 87th percentile of all CPUs, and the Intel part at the 86th.

Q: Which processor is faster in data compression?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 is significantly faster, scoring 354,510 in PassMark data compression versus the Intel's 295,100, a 20.1% advantage.

Q: Which processor has a higher core count?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235T has 14 cores, while the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 has 10 cores. However, the AMD part has 20 threads compared to the Intel's 14 threads.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235T supports 102.4 GB/s, while the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 supports 89.6 GB/s. Both use dual-channel memory buses.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm process from TSMC, with a die size of 233 mm². It belongs to the Ryzen AI 300 generation, carrying the Strix Point codename. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235T uses the Arrow Lake architecture on a 3 nm process, also from TSMC, with a die size of 243 mm² and 17,800 million transistors. It is part of the Core Ultra Series 2 family.

Core configurations diverge sharply. The AMD part has 10 cores and 20 threads, indicating simultaneous multithreading support. The Intel part has 14 cores but only 14 threads, meaning no hyper-threading on this desktop Arrow Lake-S chip. Cache layouts also differ. The AMD part has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of L3. The Intel part has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3.

Memory support shows a similar split. The AMD part supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the Intel part supports only DDR5. Both use dual-channel buses, but the Intel part delivers higher memory bandwidth at 102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s. PCIe connectivity differs by generation: the AMD part uses Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes, while the Intel part uses Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes.

The integrated graphics units are distinct. The AMD part uses the Radeon 880M, while the Intel part uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 24 execution units. Neither part supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The AMD part fits AMD Socket FP8, while the Intel part uses Intel Socket 1851. The AMD part was released on 2024-06-30, and the Intel part on 2025-01-06.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications differ in several fields. Core counts: 10 for AMD, 14 for Intel. Thread counts: 20 for AMD, 14 for Intel. Base clocks: 2.00 GHz for AMD, 2.20 GHz for Intel. Boost clocks are identical at 5.00 GHz. TDP: 28 W for AMD, 65 W for Intel. Sockets: AMD Socket FP8 versus Intel Socket 1851. Process nodes: 4 nm for AMD, 3 nm for Intel. Die size: 233 mm² for AMD, 243 mm² for Intel. Transistor count is only recorded for Intel at 17,800 million.

Cache sizes: L1 is 80 KB per core for AMD versus 192 KB per core for Intel. L2 is 1 MB per core for AMD versus 3 MB per core for Intel. L3 is 16 MB for AMD versus 24 MB shared for Intel. Memory support: DDR5 and LPDDR5X for AMD, DDR5 only for Intel. Memory bandwidth: 89.6 GB/s for AMD, 102.4 GB/s for Intel. PCIe: Gen 4 with 16 lanes for AMD, Gen 5 with 20 lanes for Intel. Integrated graphics: Radeon 880M for AMD, Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 24EU for Intel. Production status is Active for both. Market segment: Mobile for AMD, Desktop for Intel.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results show a clear split by core count and clock behavior. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 wins by 7.5% with 2,842 against 2,644. That advantage disappears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Intel Core Ultra 5 235T takes a 28.7% lead, scoring 26,232 versus 18,698. The Intel part also dominates single-core Cinebench: a 18.8% lead in R15 (373 vs. 303) and a massive 46.2% lead in R23 (3,703 vs. 1,992).

PassMark results are more evenly distributed. The AMD part wins integer math by 20.9% (101,831 vs. 84,244), data compression by 20.1% (354,510 vs. 295,100), random string sorting by 11.5% (39,447 vs. 35,377), and extended instructions by 8.2% (25,113 vs. 23,212). The Intel part wins floating-point math by 41.1% (106,546 vs. 62,802), find prime numbers by 63.2% (318 vs. 117), data encryption by 22% (23,457 vs. 18,297), physics by 21% (2,157 vs. 1,704), and multi-thread by 4.7% (30,918 vs. 29,467). In PassMark single-thread, the Intel part leads by 11.5% (4,339 vs. 3,841).

The largest margin in the entire dataset belongs to the Intel part in Cinebench R23 single-core, a 46.2% gap. The second-largest is the Intel win in PassMark find prime numbers at 63.2%, though that test uses lower absolute scores. The AMD part's largest margin is 20.9% in integer math. Overall, the Intel part wins 10 of 15 head-to-head tests, but the AMD part holds a slight edge in the average benchmark score across all recorded tests.