AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 vs Intel Core 5 221E Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 records an average benchmark score of 49796, while the Intel Core 5 221E averages 40144. The AMD part also holds a higher percentile ranking at 90 versus Intel's 87.

Q: How does the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The database shows the AMD chip sits within 0.1% of the Intel Core 9 273PE (49845 average score), 0.8% ahead of the Intel Core i5-14600KF, and 1.2% ahead of both the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G.

Q: What is the Intel Core 5 221E's position among its competitive set?

A: The Intel part is nearly tied with the AMD Ryzen 7 7700 (0.2% behind), the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 (0.2% behind), and the AMD Ryzen 9 270 (0.3% ahead). It trails the Intel Core i9-13905H by 0.4%.

Q: Which chip wins the most head-to-head benchmark comparisons?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 wins 8 of the 15 recorded head-to-head tests. The Intel Core 5 221E wins 7.

Q: What is the largest margin of victory in either direction?

A: The AMD chip's biggest win is in PassMark extended instructions, where it leads by 79.6%. The Intel chip's largest edge is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where it leads by 46.5%.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 and the Intel Core 5 221E have ECC memory support listed in the database.

The Verdict

The data separates these two clearly by workload type. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is the choice for tasks that stress data compression, encryption, extended instruction sets, random string sorting, and general multithreaded throughput. Its 8 wins include a dominant 79.6% margin in extended instructions and a 23.6% edge in data compression, which points to a processor optimized for specialized and parallel data operations.

The Intel Core 5 221E answers with raw single-core speed and traditional compute strength. It leads by 46.5% in Cinebench R23 single-core and by 19% in Cinebench R15 single-core, and it holds advantages in integer math, floating-point math, physics simulation, and prime number finding. For general desktop responsiveness, legacy application performance, and math-heavy workloads, the Intel part is the stronger pick.

The AMD chip's overall average score of 49796 versus Intel's 40144 reflects its higher standing in the aggregate database rankings. But the head-to-head split of 8 wins to 7 shows how close the contest is when individual tests are weighed. The AMD processor should be selected for data-oriented, compression-heavy, and multi-threaded server-like tasks. The Intel processor should be selected for single-threaded application response and math-intensive computing.

The Intel Core 5 221E also carries a launch MSRP of $232, while no launch MSRP is recorded for the AMD part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results tell a split story. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores 2872 against Intel's 2613, a 9.9% advantage. But in Cinebench R23 multicore, the Intel Core 5 221E reverses the outcome decisively, scoring 25933 versus 18759, a 27.7% lead. The two Cinebench versions measure differently, and the gap between them is notable: the AMD part wins the older R15 multicore test while losing the newer R23 multicore test by a wide margin.

Single-core Cinebench is entirely Intel territory. In Cinebench R15 single-core, Intel scores 368 against AMD's 298, a 19% lead. In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 3661 against 1960, a 46.5% margin. These are the largest single-test deltas in either direction, and they establish the Intel part as the clear winner for lightly threaded rendering workloads.

PassMark tests show a more balanced mix. The AMD chip wins data compression 400887 to 324285 (23.6%), data encryption 20092 to 19205 (4.6%), extended instructions 32719 to 18216 (79.6%), multithread 33486 to 30510 (9.8%), and random string sorting 43196 to 37686 (14.6%). The Intel chip wins find prime numbers 173 to 145 (16.2%), floating-point math 79028 to 72722 (8%), integer math 117813 to 109588 (7%), and physics 2230 to 1843 (17.4%).

The single-thread PassMark results are nearly identical, with AMD at 4185 and Intel at 4147, a 0.9% difference. This near tie in PassMark single-thread stands in sharp contrast to the large Intel lead in Cinebench single-core, suggesting the two tests weight different aspects of single-threaded execution.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts differ substantially. The Intel Core 5 221E has 14 cores and 20 threads, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has 8 cores and 16 threads. Despite fewer cores, the AMD chip maintains competitive multithreaded scores in several PassMark tests, which indicates higher per-core throughput in certain operations.

Clock speeds show the Intel part with a higher boost clock at 5.20 GHz versus 5.00 GHz for AMD, while the AMD base clock is higher at 3.60 GHz versus 2.70 GHz. The power envelopes differ, with AMD rated at 55 TDP and Intel at 65 TDP.

Memory configuration is a major split. The AMD chip uses LPDDR5X with a quad-channel bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel chip supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD memory bandwidth is roughly three times higher, which helps explain its leads in bandwidth-sensitive tests like data compression and random string sorting.

PCIe generation differs, with Intel supporting Gen 5 (16 lanes CPU only) and AMD supporting Gen 4 (16 lanes CPU only). The integrated graphics are different as well: AMD uses Radeon 8060S, Intel uses UHD Graphics 730.

Market segment and socket also differ. AMD is a mobile processor on AMD Socket FP11, while Intel is a desktop processor on Intel Socket 1700. The die size differs significantly: Intel measures 257 mm², while AMD is listed as 2x 70.6 mm².

Architecture Differences

The manufacturing processes come from different foundries and nodes. AMD uses TSMC at 4 nm, while Intel uses its own foundry at 10 nm. This process gap likely contributes to the AMD chip achieving its performance with a lower 55 TDP and a smaller combined die area.

The architectures themselves reflect different design philosophies. AMD is built on Zen 5 under the Strix Halo codename. Intel uses the Bartlett Lake codename with no architecture field listed in the database. AMD's generation is listed as Ryzen AI Max (Zen 5, Strix Halo), while Intel's is Core 5 (Bartlett Lake).

Cache organization differs per core. Both have 80 KB L1 per core. The L2 cache is 1 MB per core on AMD versus 2 MB per core on Intel. The L3 cache is 32 MB shared on AMD versus 24 MB shared on Intel. The AMD chip has a greater total L3 capacity, while Intel doubles the per-core L2 allocation.

The AMD chip's release date is listed as January 5, 2026, while Intel's is January 12, 2025. Both are marked as active production parts. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

The AMD part uses a 100-000001980 part number, and Intel uses SRQDVQ659. The AMD chip's memory bus and bandwidth figures point to an integrated memory controller optimized for high-throughput LPDDR5X, while Intel's dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 support targets broader platform compatibility.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 wins in data movement and specialized instruction workloads. Its 23.6% lead in data compression and 14.6% lead in random string sorting suggest strong memory bandwidth utilization. The 256.0 GB/s quad-channel LPDDR5X configuration gives it a clear advantage in these data-heavy tests. The 79.6% margin in extended instructions indicates a robust SIMD and specialized instruction execution pipeline. Its multithread win of 9.8% in PassMark, despite fewer cores, shows efficient thread scheduling and high per-core throughput in that metric.

The AMD chip also wins the older Cinebench R15 multicore test by 9.9%, which suggests its architecture handles that specific rendering workload more efficiently. Its 4.6% edge in data encryption is modest but consistent with its overall data-processing strengths.

The Intel Core 5 221E wins in single-core rendering and math-heavy computation. The 46.5% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core and 19% lead in Cinebench R15 single-core are the defining results. The 17.4% win in physics simulation and 16.2% win in prime number finding align with integer and floating-point strength. Its 7% lead in integer math and 8% lead in floating-point math confirm broad arithmetic capability.

The Intel chip also wins Cinebench R23 multicore by 27.7%, which is curious given its loss in Cinebench R15 multicore. This indicates the R23 workload scales differently with its 14 cores and 20 threads. The Intel part's higher 5.20 GHz boost clock and larger 2 MB per-core L2 cache likely contribute to its single-thread and math performance.

For PassMark single-thread, the two are effectively tied at 4185 versus 4147. Neither chip has a meaningful edge in that specific measurement, which makes the Cinebench single-core gap stand out as workload-specific rather than a general single-thread superiority.

The database shows the AMD chip with a higher average benchmark score (49796) and higher percentile (90), but the Intel chip holds its own in 7 of 15 head-to-head tests. The choice depends on whether the workload favors AMD's data compression, encryption, extended instructions, and memory bandwidth advantages, or Intel's single-core rendering, physics, integer, and floating-point math advantages.