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

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 wins all 15 head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the Intel Core 5 120UL, with no wins recorded for the Intel part. The margins are substantial across every category, ranging from a 54.8% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core to a 528.8% advantage in PassMark extended instructions.

The largest single delta appears in PassMark extended instructions, where the AMD chip scores 32,719 against the Intel chip's 5,203. This 528.8% gap indicates a massive difference in SIMD and specialized instruction throughput. The AMD processor also demonstrates overwhelming strength in memory-intensive workloads: PassMark data compression shows 400,887 versus 109,090, a 267.5% advantage. Data encryption follows a similar pattern, with 20,092 versus 7,685, a 161.4% delta.

Multi-threaded performance tells the same story. Cinebench R23 multicore results show 18,759 for the AMD part versus 8,974 for the Intel part, a 109% difference. Cinebench R15 multicore shows 2,872 versus 904, a 217.7% gap. PassMark multithread scores are 33,486 and 10,558 respectively, a 217.2% delta. The AMD chip also leads in PassMark physics (1,843 versus 807, up 128.4%) and PassMark random string sorting (43,196 versus 13,610, up 217.4%).

Single-thread performance, while closer in percentage terms than the multicore results, still favors the AMD part decisively. PassMark single-thread scores are 4,185 versus 2,080, a 101.2% delta. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 1,960 versus 1,266, a 54.8% lead. Cinebench R15 single-core records 298 versus 127, a 134.6% margin. Integer math (109,588 versus 38,060, up 187.9%) and floating-point math (72,722 versus 26,311, up 176.4%) both show the AMD processor roughly tripling the Intel output. Prime number finding also favors AMD: 145 versus 47, a 208.5% delta.

The average benchmark score for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is 49,796, placing it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Intel Core 5 120UL averages 13,594, which sits in the 68th percentile. The nearest rivals to the AMD part include the Intel Core 9 273PE (average 49,845, delta -0.1%), the Intel Core i5-14600KF (49,394, delta 0.8%), the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (49,228, delta 1.2%), and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (49,196, delta 1.2%). The Intel Core 5 120UL's nearest rivals are the Intel Core i3-12100F (13,494, delta 0.7%), the Intel Core 3 N355 (13,492, delta 0.8%), the Intel Core i5-9500 (13,452, delta 1.1%), and the Intel Core 3 304 (13,745, delta -1.1%).

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design points. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 uses the Zen 5 architecture under the Strix Halo codename, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel Core 5 120UL uses the Raptor Lake architecture under the Raptor Lake-PS codename, built on a 10 nm process at Intel. It has 10 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 1.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz.

The core counts differ in an interesting way: the Intel part has two more physical cores, yet the AMD part has four more threads. This points to the AMD chip supporting simultaneous multithreading on all 8 cores, while the Intel chip's hybrid arrangement yields only 12 threads from 10 cores. The AMD processor's higher boost clock of 5.00 GHz versus 4.60 GHz contributes to its single-thread advantage, but the base clock gap is even larger: 3.60 GHz versus 1.30 GHz.

Cache configurations also diverge. Both parts list 80 KB of L1 cache per core. The AMD chip has 1 MB of L2 per core and 32 MB of shared L3. The Intel chip has 1.25 MB of L2 per core and 12 MB of shared L3. The AMD part's larger shared L3 cache (32 MB versus 12 MB) provides a significant capacity advantage for workloads that benefit from a large last-level cache.

Memory support shows another distinction. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 supports LPDDR5X memory over a quad-channel bus, yielding a recorded memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 5 120UL supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, with no memory bandwidth figure recorded in the database and no ECC support. The AMD part's quad-channel memory interface and higher bandwidth directly explain its large leads in memory-sensitive benchmarks such as data compression and random string sorting.

The integrated graphics also differ. The AMD processor carries a Radeon 8060S, while the Intel processor uses Iris Xe Graphics 80EU. Both are integrated solutions, but the database does not include separate graphics benchmarks for comparison.

Process node and foundry differences are notable. The AMD chip is fabricated on a 4 nm node at TSMC, while the Intel chip uses a 10 nm node at Intel. The AMD die size is recorded as 2x 70.6 mm². No die size is listed for the Intel part. The AMD processor uses AMD Socket FP11, while the Intel processor uses Intel Socket 1700. The AMD part offers PCIe Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes, while the Intel part offers PCIe Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes. The AMD chip is classified as Mobile market segment, while the Intel chip is classified as Desktop. The AMD processor was released on 2026-01-05, and the Intel processor on 2024-04-07. Both are active in production, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The Verdict

The data indicates a complete performance class separation. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 sits at the 90th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the Intel Core 5 120UL sits at the 68th percentile. The AMD part's average benchmark score of 49,796 is roughly 3.7 times the Intel part's 13,594, based on the recorded averages. In every single head-to-head benchmark, the AMD part leads by at least 54.8% and by over 200% in nine of the fifteen comparisons.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is the choice for workloads that demand high single-thread performance, high multi-thread throughput, and substantial memory bandwidth. Its 5.00 GHz boost clock, 16 threads, and 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth make it suited for compute-heavy tasks. The Intel Core 5 120UL, with its 15 W TDP and 10 cores, fits a different profile: lower power consumption and a desktop socket. The Intel chip's 1.30 GHz base clock and 12 threads place it in a more modest performance tier.

Users selecting between these two should base the decision on performance requirements. The AMD part delivers roughly double the multicore performance in Cinebench R23 and more than triple the PassMark multithread score. The Intel part offers a 15 W TDP against the AMD part's 55 W TDP, which may matter for thermally constrained systems, but the benchmark data shows no performance category where the Intel chip wins.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores 1,960 in Cinebench R23 single-core, which is 54.8% higher than the Intel Core 5 120UL's 1,266.

Q: How do the multicore scores compare in Cinebench R15?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores 2,872, while the Intel Core 5 120UL scores 904. The AMD part leads by 217.7%.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s using quad-channel LPDDR5X. The Intel Core 5 120UL has no memory bandwidth figure recorded in the database; it uses dual-channel DDR4 or DDR5.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 5 120UL has 10 cores and 12 threads. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two in the head-to-head tests?

A: The largest delta is in PassMark extended instructions, where the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores 32,719 versus the Intel Core 5 120UL's 5,203, a 528.8% advantage.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has a 55 W TDP, and the Intel Core 5 120UL has a 15 W TDP.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 wins in every recorded benchmark category. The data shows no workload where the Intel Core 5 120UL takes the lead. The AMD part's advantages are most pronounced in extended instructions (528.8% lead), data compression (267.5%), random string sorting (217.4%), multithread (217.2%), and Cinebench R15 multicore (217.7%). These categories point to workloads involving heavy data movement, parallel processing, and specialized instruction sets.

The Intel Core 5 120UL's only comparative advantage lies outside the benchmark scores: its 15 W TDP is substantially lower than the AMD part's 55 W TDP, and it uses the Intel Socket 1700 desktop platform. For systems where power draw is the primary constraint, the Intel part's lower TDP may be relevant, but the recorded benchmark data does not show a performance scenario where it wins.

For compute-intensive applications such as video encoding, scientific simulation, data compression, and encryption, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is the stronger part by a wide margin. Its 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 32 MB L3 cache support these workloads. The Intel Core 5 120UL, with its 12 MB L3 cache and dual-channel memory, operates in a lower performance tier, closer in average score to the Intel Core i3-12100F and Core 3 N355 than to the AMD part.

The AMD processor's 90th percentile ranking places it among the top decile of all CPUs in the database, while the Intel processor's 68th percentile places it in the upper two-thirds. The nearest rivals to the AMD part, such as the Intel Core 9 273PE and AMD Ryzen 9 7900, all have average scores within 1.2% of the AMD chip, confirming its position in a high-performance class. The Intel Core 5 120UL's nearest rivals, including the Intel Core i5-9500 and Core 3 304, all sit within 1.1% of its average score, confirming a much lower performance tier.