AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 vs Intel Core 5 120 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a decisive overall victory for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388, which wins 14 of the 15 recorded head-to-head comparisons. The single exception is Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Intel Core 5 120 posts 2577 against 1960, a 23.9% advantage. That result stands out because it is the one workload where Intel’s higher per-core clock behavior overcomes AMD’s newer architecture.

Every other comparison favors AMD, often by a wide margin. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores 2872 versus 1840, a 56.1% lead. The R23 multi-core gap is much smaller at 2.8%, with AMD scoring 18759 against 18255. That near-tie in the newer Cinebench version contrasts sharply with the older R15 test, suggesting the longer R23 workload lets Intel’s six cores sustain competitive throughput despite fewer threads.

The Passmark suite amplifies AMD’s dominance. Data compression shows 400887 against 219535, an 82.6% margin. Data encryption follows at 20092 versus 11131, an 80.5% lead. Extended instructions deliver the largest single delta at 129.4%, with AMD at 32719 and Intel at 14264. Floating point math goes 72722 to 45383, a 60.2% advantage. Integer math lands at 109588 versus 60462, up 81.3%. Prime number finding, a notoriously heavy workload, shows 145 against 77, an 88.3% gap. Random string sorting reaches 43196 versus 21499, a 100.9% doubling. Multi-thread performance sits at 33486 against 18597, an 80.1% lead. Physics simulation posts 1843 versus 1333, up 38.3%. Single-thread Passmark scores 4185 against 3595, a 16.4% edge.

The average benchmark score in the database places the AMD part at 49796, which puts it in the 90th percentile among all CPUs. The Intel part averages 25362, sitting in the 77th percentile. The AMD chip’s nearest rivals are the Intel Core 9 273PE at 49845 (0.1% behind), the Intel Core i5-14600KF at 49394 (0.8% ahead), the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 at 49228 (1.2% ahead), and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G at 49196 (1.2% ahead). The Intel Core 5 120’s nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D at 25365 (0.0% delta), the Intel Core i7-11700KF at 25423 (0.2% behind), the Intel Core i5-13400F at 25292 (0.3% ahead), and the AMD Ryzen 7 7840U at 25432 (0.3% behind).

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 wins everywhere except one narrow per-core test. Its largest advantages appear in workloads that scale with thread count, memory bandwidth, and SIMD-style instruction throughput. Extended instructions, integer math, data compression, and encryption all show leads above 80%. These are the tasks that benefit from the combination of 16 threads, a 32 MB shared L3 cache, and quad-channel LPDDR5X memory at 256.0 GB/s. The data indicates this processor is built for sustained parallel computation, content creation, and data-heavy workloads.

The Intel Core 5 120 holds one meaningful victory: Cinebench R23 single-core. A 23.9% margin there suggests that for lightly threaded tasks that depend on a single core’s peak performance, Intel’s Raptor Lake design still has an edge. The R15 single-core test tells a different story, with AMD ahead 15.1% (298 versus 259). So the single-core picture depends on the benchmark version. R23 rewards Intel, R15 rewards AMD. In the Passmark single-thread tests, AMD leads by 16.4% at 4185 versus 3595.

For general desktop responsiveness, the AMD part’s Passmark single-thread score of 4185 indicates strong everyday performance. The Intel part’s 3595 is not weak, but it trails by a clear margin. The only scenario where the Intel chip appears preferable from the recorded data is a specific single-core rendering workload, and even then the R15 result contradicts that advantage.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies and manufacturing processes. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 uses Zen 5 architecture on the Strix Halo codename, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core 5 120 uses Raptor Lake architecture on the Raptor Lake-R codename, built on a 10 nm process at Intel’s own foundry. The die size reflects this difference: AMD’s design is listed as 2x 70.6 mm², while Intel’s is 163 mm².

Core counts differ substantially. AMD provides 8 cores and 16 threads, while Intel provides 6 cores and 12 threads. Both parts lock the multiplier, so neither supports user overclocking. Base and boost clocks also differ: AMD starts at 3.60 GHz and boosts to 5.00 GHz, while Intel starts at 2.50 GHz and boosts to 4.50 GHz. Despite the lower clocks, Intel still wins the R23 single-core test, which points to architectural efficiency in that specific workload rather than raw clock advantage.

Cache hierarchies are similar in per-core L1 size at 80 KB per core, but differ in L2 and L3. AMD uses 1 MB L2 per core and 32 MB shared L3. Intel uses 1.25 MB L2 per core and 18 MB shared L3. The larger shared L3 on AMD likely contributes to its big wins in data compression and encryption, where working sets can exceed Intel’s cache capacity.

Memory support diverges completely. AMD uses LPDDR5X with a quad-channel bus and a recorded bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. Intel uses DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and no bandwidth figure recorded. AMD also supports ECC memory, while Intel does not. The memory bandwidth difference alone explains part of the multi-threaded gap, especially in workloads that stream large data sets.

PCIe support also differs. AMD offers Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes, while Intel offers Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. Intel’s newer PCIe generation provides higher potential transfer rates, but the database does not record any benchmark that isolates PCIe performance. Integrated graphics differ as well: AMD pairs the CPU with a Radeon 8060S, while Intel uses UHD Graphics 730.

Market positioning is clear from the data. AMD targets the mobile segment with an AMD Socket FP11, while Intel targets the desktop segment with Intel Socket 1700. The AMD part has a TDP of 55 watts, and the Intel part has a TDP of 65 watts. Release dates differ by about five months, with AMD launching on 2026-01-05 and Intel on 2025-07-30.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores 18759, which is 2.8% ahead of the Intel Core 5 120’s 18255.

Q: Is the Intel Core 5 120 better at any single benchmark?

A: Yes, the Intel Core 5 120 wins Cinebench R23 single-core with 2577 against 1960, a 23.9% margin. It loses Cinebench R15 single-core by 15.1% and Passmark single-thread by 16.4%.

Q: How do the two compare in memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 uses quad-channel LPDDR5X with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 5 120 uses dual-channel DDR4 or DDR5, with no bandwidth figure recorded in the database.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 5 120 does not.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core 5 120 has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Which processor has the larger L3 cache?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has 32 MB shared L3. The Intel Core 5 120 has 18 MB shared L3.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 | Intel Core 5 120 |

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

| Cores | 8 | 6 |

| Threads | 16 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 3.60 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 4.50 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP11 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Raptor Lake |

| Codename | Strix Halo | Raptor Lake-R |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die Size | 2x 70.6 mm² | 163 mm² |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB per core | 1.25 MB per core |

| L3 Cache | 32 MB shared | 18 MB shared |

| Memory Support | LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Quad-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | Not recorded |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

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

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 8060S | UHD Graphics 730 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2026-01-05 | 2025-07-30 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $211 |

| Part Number | 100-000001980 | SA35V |

The Verdict

The recorded benchmark data points to the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 as the stronger processor in nearly every measurable workload. Its 14-to-1 win count, combined with an average benchmark score of 49796 in the 90th percentile, places it well above the Intel Core 5 120’s 25362 average in the 77th percentile. The AMD part’s nearest rivals are all higher-end desktop and mobile chips, while the Intel part competes with mid-range parts like the Ryzen 5 5600X3D and Core i5-13400F.

The Intel Core 5 120 does hold a genuine single-core advantage in Cinebench R23, and that matters for users who run that specific rendering path. It also uses a desktop socket with PCIe Gen 5 support, which may matter for expansion. But the data shows no multi-threaded workload where Intel wins, and the gaps in data compression, encryption, extended instructions, integer math, and floating point are all above 60%.

The AMD part’s mobile socket and 55 W TDP suggest it targets high-performance laptops and compact systems, while the Intel part’s desktop socket and 65 W TDP target traditional towers. The AMD chip’s 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 32 MB L3 cache give it a structural advantage in bandwidth-sensitive tasks. The Intel chip’s higher boost clock of 4.50 GHz does not translate into broad single-thread superiority, given the R15 and Passmark single-thread results favor AMD.

For anyone choosing between these two, the data favors AMD for parallel workloads, content creation, encryption, and any task that uses more than six cores. Intel remains preferable only for the specific Cinebench R23 single-core case, and even that advantage does not appear in other single-thread tests. The Intel part’s launch MSRP of $211 places it in a different price class, but the performance gap in the database is substantial regardless of positioning.