AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 vs Intel Core 5 320 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive overall victory for the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385, which wins 16 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The lone exception is the Cinebench R15 single-core test, where the Intel Core 5 320 posts a score of 276 against 222 for the AMD part, a 19.6% advantage. That result is notable because it is the only test in the entire database comparison where the Intel processor leads, and it suggests a strong single-threaded burst capability in older rendering workloads.

The magnitude of the AMD advantage grows dramatically as the workload becomes more multi-threaded. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ryzen AI Max 385 scores 15674 against 6197 for the Intel Core 5 320, a 152.9% lead. The same pattern appears in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the AMD part scores 6583 versus 5462, a 20.5% margin. The R15 multi-core test shows a 49.8% difference, with the AMD chip at 1579 and the Intel chip at 1054. These results indicate that the combination of 8 cores and 16 threads on the AMD side provides a substantial scaling advantage over the 6-core, 6-thread Intel configuration.

Single-core results outside of R15 tell a different story. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 scores 2212 versus 1926, a 14.8% lead. Cinebench R20 single-core shows the AMD part at 929 versus 771, also a 20.5% advantage. The PassMark single-thread test is nearly a tie, with the AMD chip at 4060 and the Intel chip at 4045, a margin of only 0.4%. This near-parity in PassMark single-thread performance suggests that the Intel part is competitive in lightly threaded integer work, but the Cinebench results show the AMD architecture has a clear edge in rendering-oriented single-thread performance.

The largest deltas appear in PassMark integer math, where the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 scores 107046 against 32323, a 231.2% lead. Data compression shows a 173.2% advantage, with scores of 406505 versus 148779. Extended instructions tests show a 155.4% margin, with the AMD part at 33873 and the Intel part at 13262. These three tests highlight a significant gap in raw compute throughput, likely related to the AMD chip's larger core count and higher memory bandwidth.

Other PassMark tests reinforce the pattern. Floating point math shows a 67.5% lead for the AMD part, scoring 71105 against 42440. Multi-thread performance shows a 118.2% margin, with scores of 33705 versus 15450. Random string sorting shows a 142.4% lead, with the AMD chip at 43725 and the Intel chip at 18038. Data encryption shows an 81.4% margin, with scores of 19926 versus 10984. Prime number finding shows a 50% lead, with the AMD part at 165 versus 110. The physics test shows a 54.7% margin, with the AMD chip at 1889 and the Intel chip at 1221.

Given these measured results, the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 delivers a substantially higher average benchmark score. The database records an average benchmark score of 44309 for the AMD part versus 18023 for the Intel part. The AMD chip sits at the 88th percentile among all CPUs in the database, while the Intel chip sits at the 72nd percentile. The nearest rivals for the AMD part include the Intel Core i9-13950HX with an average score of 44342 and a delta of -0.1%, the Intel Core i5-13600 with 44240 and a delta of 0.2%, the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H with 44466 and a delta of -0.4%, and the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D with 44573 and a delta of -0.6%. For the Intel Core 5 320, the nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 with 17994 and a delta of 0.2%, the Intel Core 5 120U with 17898 and a delta of 0.7%, the Intel Core i5-1334U with 18154 and a delta of -0.7%, and the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT with 17891 and a delta of 0.7%.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates two processors with very different intended roles. The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 is positioned for workloads that demand high multi-threaded throughput. Its 152.9% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 231.2% lead in PassMark integer math make it the clear choice for rendering, compilation, and heavy number crunching. The Intel Core 5 320, by contrast, shows a 19.6% win in Cinebench R15 single-core, but that advantage does not persist in newer single-thread tests, where the AMD part leads by 14.8% in R23 single-core and ties in PassMark single-thread.

The database places the AMD chip at the 88th percentile versus the 72nd percentile for the Intel chip. The average benchmark scores differ by a factor of roughly 2.5, with the AMD part at 44309 and the Intel part at 18023. Users who need sustained multi-core performance should select the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 based on the recorded data. Users who prioritize the specific R15 single-core result and operate within a very low power envelope may consider the Intel Core 5 320, but the overall benchmark profile heavily favors the AMD part.

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 die consists of two chiplets, each measuring 70.6 mm². The Intel Core 5 320 uses the Wildcat Lake codename with an Intel 3 nm process, and the database does not record a die size for this part.

The AMD chip has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel chip has 6 cores and 6 threads, with a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The lack of hyper-threading on the Intel part is a notable architectural difference, as it reduces the thread count to match the core count.

Cache organization differs significantly. The AMD part has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part has 192 KB of L1 cache total, 2.5 MB of L2 cache total, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD configuration provides more L3 cache for the entire package, which helps with data-heavy workloads.

Memory support also differs. The AMD part uses LPDDR5X with a quad-channel memory bus and 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, but uses a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD part supports ECC memory, while the Intel part does not. This memory bandwidth difference likely contributes to the large deltas in data compression and encryption tests.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 includes a Radeon 8050S, while the Intel Core 5 320 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The database does not record benchmark scores for these iGPUs, so a direct comparison is not possible from the available data.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specification fields. The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 has 8 cores versus 6 cores, and 16 threads versus 6 threads. The base clock is 3.60 GHz for the AMD part versus 1.50 GHz for the Intel part. The boost clock is 5.00 GHz for the AMD part versus 4.60 GHz for the Intel part. The TDP is 55 watts for the AMD part versus 15 watts for the Intel part.

The socket types differ: the AMD part uses AMD Socket FP11, while the Intel part uses Intel BGA 1516. The process node is 4 nm for the AMD part versus 3 nm for the Intel part. The foundry is TSMC for AMD and Intel for the Intel part. The memory bus is quad-channel for the AMD part versus single-channel for the Intel part. Memory bandwidth is 256.0 GB/s versus 59.7 GB/s. ECC support is present on the AMD part but absent on the Intel part. PCIe support is Gen 4 with 16 lanes on the AMD part versus Gen 4 with 6 lanes on the Intel part.

The integrated graphics are Radeon 8050S on the AMD part versus Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) on the Intel part. The release dates differ, with the AMD part released on 2025-01-05 and the Intel part released on 2026-04-15. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $340, while the AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP. Both parts have locked multipliers. The part numbers are 100-000001424 for AMD and SAE3H for Intel.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 has a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, while the Intel Core 5 320 has a boost clock of 4.60 GHz.

Q: How does the memory bandwidth compare?

A: The AMD part provides 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth via a quad-channel LPDDR5X interface, while the Intel part provides 59.7 GB/s via a single-channel interface that supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 has a TDP of 55 watts, while the Intel Core 5 320 has a TDP of 15 watts.

Q: Does the Intel Core 5 320 support ECC memory?

A: No, the Intel part does not support ECC memory. The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 does support ECC memory.

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

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 scores 15674, which is 152.9% higher than the Intel Core 5 320 score of 6197.

Q: What is the only benchmark where the Intel Core 5 320 wins?

A: The Intel part wins in Cinebench R15 single-core, scoring 276 against 222 for the AMD part, a 19.6% margin.