AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 vs Intel Core 5 315 Comparison

AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 vs Intel Core 5 315

The benchmark data records 17 individual test wins for the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 and zero wins for the Intel Core 5 315 across the full head-to-head suite. The AMD part posts a 20.7% advantage in every Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core and single-core test, while its average benchmark score of 44309 places it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 5 315, with an average score of 18188, sits in the 72nd percentile. The two processors target different mobile segments, and the data reflects that positioning clearly.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 wins every recorded benchmark category, but the size of the win varies dramatically by workload type. In single-threaded PassMark tests, the AMD part scores 4060 against 4021 for the Intel part, a 1% delta that shows near parity in lightly threaded tasks. The Cinebench single-core tests tell a different story, with the AMD part ahead by 20.7% in R15, R20, and R23. That gap between PassMark single-thread and Cinebench single-core results suggests the AMD architecture has a larger advantage in sustained or multi-iteration rendering workloads than in shorter integer-heavy single-thread tasks.

Multi-threaded and throughput-oriented tests show the widest margins. The AMD part leads by 237.8% in PassMark integer math, 178.2% in data compression, and 157.7% in extended instructions. These are the workloads where the AMD part's 8 cores and 16 threads against the Intel part's 6 cores and 6 threads produce the largest deltas. PassMark floating point math shows a 67.5% lead, and the multithread test shows a 120.7% lead. The Intel Core 5 315 does not win any category, but its closest result outside single-thread PassMark is the PassMark physics test, where the AMD part leads by 62.4%.

The data indicates that the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 is the stronger choice for content creation, rendering, data processing, and any workload that scales with thread count or uses SIMD-style instructions. The Intel Core 5 315 holds its own only in the narrow case of single-threaded PassMark integer work, where it trails by just 1%. For users whose primary tasks involve short, single-threaded bursts, the two parts are effectively equivalent; for everything else, the AMD part is measurably ahead.

The Verdict

The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 is the higher-performing processor in every recorded benchmark. Its average benchmark score of 44309 is 143.8% higher than the Intel part's 18188, and it ranks in the 88th percentile versus the 72nd percentile for the Intel Core 5 315. The nearest rivals to the AMD part are the Intel Core i9-13950HX at 44342 (0.1% lower), the Intel Core i5-13600 at 44240 (0.2% lower), the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H at 44466 (0.4% higher), and the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D at 44573 (0.6% higher). The Intel Core 5 315's nearest rivals are the AMD EPYC 9274F at 18189 (0.0% delta), the Intel Core i7-9700 at 18180 (0.0% delta), the Intel Core i7-1365U at 18177 (0.1% higher), and the AMD Ryzen 7 5700U at 18176 (0.1% higher). The Intel part's average score places it in a completely different performance class, closer to older desktop and low-power mobile parts than to the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385.

The Intel Core 5 315 is a 15W mobile processor with 6 cores and 6 threads, a 1.50 GHz base clock, and a 4.40 GHz boost clock. The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 is a 55W part with 8 cores and 16 threads, a 3.60 GHz base clock, and a 5.00 GHz boost clock. The data shows that the AMD part delivers approximately 20.7% higher Cinebench scores across the board and between 47.3% and 237.8% higher PassMark scores depending on the workload. The Intel part's launch MSRP is $340, which is the only pricing data recorded in the database.

For users who need maximum multi-threaded throughput, the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 is the clear choice based on the recorded data. For users whose workloads are dominated by light single-threaded tasks and who require the lower power envelope of a 15W processor, the Intel Core 5 315 offers competitive single-thread PassMark performance, trailing by only 1%. The AMD part is not the right pick for ultra-low-power mobile designs given its 55W TDP, but the benchmark results show no workload category where the Intel part outperforms it.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results are uniform. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD part scores 1579 against 1308, a 20.7% lead. In R15 single-core, the scores are 222 against 184, also a 20.7% lead. R20 multi-core shows 6583 against 5452, a 20.7% lead, and R20 single-core shows 929 against 769, a 20.8% lead. R23 multi-core shows 15674 against 12981, a 20.7% lead, and R23 single-core shows 2212 against 1832, a 20.7% lead. The consistency of the 20.7% delta across all six Cinebench tests indicates that the performance difference is largely clock-for-clock architectural and scales evenly across both single and multi-core rendering workloads.

The PassMark suite reveals where the AMD part's extra cores and threads matter most. PassMark integer math shows the largest delta at 237.8%, with scores of 107046 against 31690. Data compression shows a 178.2% delta (406505 against 146143), and extended instructions show a 157.7% delta (33873 against 13143). Random string sorting follows at 149.1% (43725 against 17551), and the multithread test shows a 120.7% delta (33705 against 15272). Data encryption shows a 79.2% delta (19926 against 11119), floating point math shows a 67.5% delta (71105 against 42441), and physics shows a 62.4% delta (1889 against 1163). Prime number finding shows the smallest multi-thread delta after the single-thread tests at 47.3% (165 against 112).

The single-thread PassMark results are the closest comparison in the entire suite. The AMD part scores 4060 and the Intel part scores 4021, a 1% delta. This stands in contrast to the Cinebench single-core results, where the AMD part leads by 20.7%. The discrepancy suggests that the PassMark single-thread test is less sensitive to the architectural and clock differences between Zen 5 and Wildcat Lake than the Cinebench rendering workload. The data shows that the AMD part wins all 17 head-to-head tests, but the magnitude of the win ranges from a marginal 1% to a dominant 237.8%.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 has an average benchmark score of 44309, while the Intel Core 5 315 has an average score of 18188. The AMD part ranks in the 88th percentile of all CPUs, and the Intel part ranks in the 72nd percentile.

Q: How large is the AMD part's lead in multi-core rendering?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 leads by 20.7% in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests. Specific scores are 1579 versus 1308 in R15, 6583 versus 5452 in R20, and 15674 versus 12981 in R23.

Q: Is the Intel Core 5 315 competitive in any single-threaded test?

A: The Intel part trails by only 1% in the PassMark single-thread test, scoring 4021 against 4060. However, it trails by 20.7% in all Cinebench single-core tests, so its competitive position depends on the specific single-threaded workload.

Q: What is the largest performance delta between the two processors?

A: The largest delta is in PassMark integer math, where the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 scores 107046 against 31690 for the Intel Core 5 315, a 237.8% lead.

Q: What are the nearest rivals to each processor in the database?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385's nearest rival is the Intel Core i9-13950HX at an average score of 44342, a 0.1% difference. The Intel Core 5 315's nearest rival is the AMD EPYC 9274F at an average score of 18189, a 0.0% difference.

Q: Which processor uses more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 uses 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core 5 315 uses 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning it has no hyper-threading or equivalent multi-threading capability.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 uses the Zen 5 architecture under the Strix Halo codename, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core 5 315 uses the Wildcat Lake codename, built on a 3 nm process at Intel. The AMD part is a dual-die design with a die size of 2x 70.6 mm², while the Intel die size is not recorded in the database. The AMD part's cache hierarchy is structured as 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3. The Intel part uses 192 KB of L1 total, 2.5 MB of L2 total, and 6 MB of shared L3. The AMD part supports ECC memory, while the Intel part does not.

Both processors are mobile parts with active production status, but they belong to different generations and market tiers. The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 is part of the Ryzen AI Max generation, released on 2025-01-05. The Intel Core 5 315 is part of the Core 5 generation, released on 2026-04-15. The AMD part integrates a Radeon 8050S GPU, while the Intel part integrates Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The AMD part has a part number of 100-000001424, and the Intel part has a part number of SAEFC. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts differ significantly: the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads. Base clocks are 3.60 GHz for the AMD part and 1.50 GHz for the Intel part. Boost clocks are 5.00 GHz for the AMD part and 4.40 GHz for the Intel part. The TDP is 55W for the AMD part and 15W for the Intel part, a 40W difference that explains the Intel part's suitability for lower-power mobile designs.

The memory subsystems are also different. The AMD part supports LPDDR5X memory over a quad-channel bus with 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD part supports ECC memory; the Intel part does not. PCIe connectivity differs as well, with the AMD part offering Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes and the Intel part offering Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes. The sockets are different: AMD Socket FP11 for the AMD part and Intel BGA 1516 for the Intel part. The integrated graphics differ, with the Radeon 8050S on the AMD side and Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) on the Intel side. The release dates are also different, with the AMD part launching on 2025-01-05 and the Intel part on 2026-04-15. The Intel part has a recorded launch MSRP of $340, while no launch MSRP is recorded for the AMD part.