AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 vs Intel Core 5 210H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 wins every single recorded head-to-head test against the Intel Core 5 210H, with a 15-0 sweep. The largest margins appear in compute-heavy workloads. In PassMark's extended instructions test, the AMD part scores 32,719 versus 13,370 for Intel, a 144.7% advantage. Prime number finding shows an even larger gap: 145 versus 53, a 173.6% difference. These two tests indicate that the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has a substantial advantage in workloads that leverage specialized instruction sets and heavy integer iteration.

Multi-threaded performance also heavily favors AMD. Cinebench R23 multicore shows the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scoring 18,759 versus 11,830 for the Core 5 210H, a 58.6% lead. The older Cinebench R15 multicore test shows a similar story: 2,872 versus 1,757, a 63.5% delta. PassMark's multithread test records 33,486 for AMD against 18,252 for Intel, an 83.5% margin. The data compression test shows 400,887 for AMD versus 217,805 for Intel, a 84.1% advantage, and integer math shows 109,588 versus 61,503, a 78.2% lead.

Single-threaded performance is closer but still favors AMD. In Cinebench R23 singlecore, the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores 1,960 versus 1,771 for Intel, a 10.7% advantage. Cinebench R15 singlecore shows 298 versus 247, a 20.6% delta. PassMark's single thread test records 4,185 for AMD versus 3,539 for Intel, an 18.3% lead. The floating point math test shows 72,722 versus 45,057, a 61.4% margin, while random string sorting shows 43,196 versus 23,451, an 84.2% gap. Data encryption shows 20,092 versus 12,187, a 64.9% delta, and the physics test shows 1,843 versus 1,040, a 77.2% advantage.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear performance hierarchy: the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is in a different class. Its average benchmark score of 49,796 places it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the Intel Core 5 210H's average of 24,872 sits at the 77th percentile. The AMD part's nearest rivals include the Intel Core 9 273PE, which scores 49,845, a negligible 0.1% difference, and the Intel Core i5-14600KF at 49,394, which is 0.8% behind. The Intel Core 5 210H, by contrast, is surrounded by the Intel Core i7-13620H (24,911, 0.2% ahead), the AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX (24,822, 0.2% behind), and the Intel Core i7-11850H (24,935, 0.3% ahead).

For users whose workloads are captured by these benchmarks, the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is the stronger processor. It delivers roughly double the multi-threaded throughput of the Intel part in several tests, and it maintains a solid single-thread lead. The Intel Core 5 210H is competitive within its own performance tier, trading places with the Ryzen 9 5900HX and Core i7-13620H, but it cannot challenge the AMD part's results. The database shows no benchmark where the Intel chip wins, so any selection between these two should be based on the AMD part's clear performance advantage.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies and manufacturing processes. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 uses the Zen 5 architecture on TSMC's 4 nm node, with a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². It has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The cache layout per core is 80 KB L1 and 1 MB L2, with 32 MB of shared L3. Memory support is LPDDR5X over a quad-channel bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth, and it supports ECC memory. PCIe is Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics are Radeon 8060S.

The Intel Core 5 210H uses the Raptor Lake architecture on Intel's 10 nm node (Raptor Lake-H refresh). It has 8 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The cache layout per core is 80 KB L1 and 2 MB L2, with 12 MB of shared L3. Memory support is DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, with no ECC support. PCIe is Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics are Iris Xe Graphics 48EU. The Intel part launched with a launch MSRP of $342, while the AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP.

The core count is the same at 8, but the thread count differs: 16 for AMD versus 12 for Intel. This explains part of the multi-threaded performance gap. The AMD part also runs at higher clocks, with a 0.40 GHz higher boost and a 1.40 GHz higher base. The memory bandwidth difference is substantial: 256.0 GB/s versus no recorded bandwidth for Intel, but the dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 setup on Intel is qualitatively narrower than AMD's quad-channel LPDDR5X. The process node difference, 4 nm versus 10 nm, likely contributes to the efficiency and clock headroom advantages.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 boosts to 5.00 GHz, while the Intel Core 5 210H boosts to 4.80 GHz. The AMD part also has a base clock of 3.60 GHz versus 2.20 GHz for Intel.

Q: How much faster is the AMD part in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores 18,759 versus 11,830 for the Intel Core 5 210H, a 58.6% advantage.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has 256.0 GB/s over a quad-channel LPDDR5X bus. The Intel Core 5 210H supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, with no bandwidth figure recorded in the database.

Q: Does the Intel Core 5 210H support ECC memory?

A: No, ECC memory support is not listed for the Intel part. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 does support ECC memory.

Q: What are the nearest rivals by average benchmark score for each processor?

A: For the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388, the nearest rival is the Intel Core 9 273PE at 49,845, a 0.1% difference. For the Intel Core 5 210H, the nearest rival is the Intel Core i7-13620H at 24,911, a 0.2% delta.

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has 16 threads, while the Intel Core 5 210H has 12 threads. Both have 8 cores.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 wins every benchmark category recorded. Its largest victories are in extended instructions (144.7% ahead) and prime number finding (173.6% ahead), indicating a strong fit for scientific computing, encryption workloads, and any task that uses SIMD or specialized instruction paths. The multithread test shows an 83.5% lead, making the AMD part a clear choice for video rendering, compilation, and other parallel workloads. The data compression test (84.1% ahead) and integer math (78.2% ahead) reinforce this pattern for data processing tasks.

The single-thread margin is smaller, with a 10.7% lead in Cinebench R23 singlecore and an 18.3% lead in PassMark single thread. This suggests the AMD part is also competitive for lightly threaded applications like web browsing, office productivity, and general desktop responsiveness, though the gap is narrower. The floating point math test (61.4% ahead) and physics test (77.2% ahead) point to advantages in simulation and physics-based workloads.

The Intel Core 5 210H does not win in any recorded benchmark. Its performance profile places it near the AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX (0.2% behind) and Intel Core i7-13620H (0.2% behind), meaning it is a mid-tier mobile processor. Its dual-channel memory support and 12 threads limit its multi-threaded ceiling. For users constrained to the Intel platform, it is a serviceable part, but the database shows no workload where it outperforms the Ryzen AI Max+ 388.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 | Intel Core 5 210H |

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

| Cores | 8 | 8 |

| Threads | 16 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 3.60 GHz | 2.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 45 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP11 | Intel BGA 1744 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Raptor Lake |

| Codename | Strix Halo | Raptor Lake-H |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 32 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5 |

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

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 8 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 8060S | Iris Xe Graphics 48EU |

| Release Date | 2026-01-05 | 2024-12-17 |

| Part Number | 100-000001980 | SRQ6RQ5MN |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | No |