AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 245 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 and Intel Core Ultra 5 245 present a stark contrast in design philosophy and benchmark outcomes. The data shows a decisive victory for the Intel part across the majority of tested workloads, yet the AMD processor secures a notable win in a specific computational area. With the Intel chip winning 14 of 15 head-to-head comparisons, the analysis reveals a clear performance hierarchy, though the single AMD victory highlights a distinct architectural strength.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 dominates the benchmark suite, particularly in multi-threaded and single-threaded workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel part scores 32,924 against the AMD’s 18,759, a substantial 43% advantage. This gap is even wider in Cinebench R23 single-core, where Intel leads with 4,648 points versus 1,960, a 57.8% delta that underscores a major difference in per-thread performance. The older Cinebench R15 tests echo this trend: Intel wins multi-core with 3,318 versus 2,872 (13.4% ahead) and single-core with 468 versus 298 (36.3% ahead).

The PassMark suite reinforces Intel’s lead, though with varying margins. In floating-point math, Intel scores 120,548 against AMD’s 72,722, a 39.7% advantage. The find-prime-numbers test shows Intel at 365 versus 145, a 60.3% delta, the largest single gap in the entire comparison. Data encryption also favors Intel significantly: 30,236 versus 20,092, a 33.5% difference. Physics simulation results follow suit, with Intel at 2,569 versus 1,843, a 28.3% lead. Multithread performance in PassMark gives Intel 38,706 against 33,486, a 13.5% margin, while random string sorting sees Intel ahead at 49,140 versus 43,196 (12.1%).

Single-threaded results remain consistently in Intel’s favor, though the margin narrows. PassMark single-thread scores show Intel at 4,394 versus 4,185, a 4.8% edge. Extended instructions are nearly identical, with Intel at 33,304 versus 32,719, a marginal 1.8% advantage. Data compression is effectively a tie: Intel scores 400,942 against AMD’s 400,887, a delta of 0%. This near-parity suggests that the compression workload is equally well-served by both architectures.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 secures its sole victory in PassMark integer math, scoring 109,588 against Intel’s 91,187. This 20.2% advantage is significant and indicates that AMD’s processing cores excel at integer arithmetic operations, a strength that could translate to specific productivity tasks. However, this single win does little to offset the overall trend, as Intel’s victories span a broader range of workloads with larger margins. The aggregate average benchmark scores reflect this: Intel’s average is 48,995, while AMD’s is 49,796, placing AMD slightly ahead by 1.6% despite losing most individual tests. Both processors sit at the 90th percentile among all CPUs.

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 compare to the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 in multi-core rendering?

A: The Intel part is significantly faster. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, Intel scores 32,924 versus AMD’s 18,759, a 43% advantage. The Cinebench R15 multi-core test shows a smaller but still clear lead for Intel: 3,318 versus 2,872, or 13.4% ahead.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 win any benchmark tests?

A: Yes, the AMD processor wins PassMark integer math with a score of 109,588 versus Intel’s 91,187, a 20.2% advantage. This is the only test among the 15 head-to-head comparisons where AMD comes out ahead.

Q: Which processor has better single-threaded performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 consistently outperforms the AMD chip in single-threaded tests. In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 4,648 versus 1,960, a 57.8% lead. PassMark single-thread shows a narrower gap: 4,394 versus 4,185, a 4.8% advantage for Intel.

Q: How close are the two processors in memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has a significant memory bandwidth advantage, supporting 256.0 GB/s over a quad-channel LPDDR5X interface, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 supports 102.4 GB/s over dual-channel DDR5. This difference does not appear to translate into a benchmark win for AMD in the tested workloads.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor, and how do they rank?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has an average benchmark score of 49,796, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 scores 48,995. Both are at the 90th percentile of all CPUs, with AMD holding a 1.6% edge in this aggregate metric.

Q: Are these processors comparable in their nearest rival performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388’s nearest rival is the Intel Core 9 273PE, with a delta of -0.1%, meaning they are nearly identical in average score. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245’s nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G, with a delta of -0.4%, also indicating close performance parity.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures targeting distinct market segments. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm process from TSMC, with a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². It features 8 cores and 16 threads, with 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 uses the Arrow Lake architecture on a 3 nm process, also from TSMC, with a die size of 243 mm² and 17,800 million transistors. It has 14 cores and 14 threads, with 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache.

Memory support differs significantly. The AMD chip uses LPDDR5X memory with a quad-channel bus and a theoretical bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. The Intel chip uses DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. Both support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity also diverges: AMD offers Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while Intel provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics vary as well, with AMD featuring the Radeon 8060S and Intel the Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU.

The process node difference is notable, with Intel using a more advanced 3 nm process versus AMD’s 4 nm. However, AMD compensates with a larger L3 cache and higher memory bandwidth. The Intel part has a higher boost clock at 5.10 GHz versus AMD’s 5.00 GHz, and a slightly higher base clock at 3.50 GHz versus 3.60 GHz, with Intel having the edge in boost. The Intel chip also has a higher TDP of 65 watts versus AMD’s 55 watts. Both processors are production active, with AMD releasing on 2026-01-05 and Intel on 2025-01-06. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $270, while AMD’s is not listed.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is the superior processor for most computational tasks, winning 14 of 15 head-to-head benchmarks. Its dominance in Cinebench multi-core and single-core tests, with leads of 43% and 57.8% respectively, makes it the clear choice for rendering, productivity, and general desktop workloads. The Intel chip also excels in floating-point math, encryption, and physics simulations, where its margins range from 28.3% to 39.7%. For users prioritizing raw performance across a broad spectrum of applications, the Intel part is the data-backed recommendation.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388, despite its single win in integer math, holds a slightly higher average benchmark score of 49,796 versus 48,995. This suggests that its performance is more balanced across the aggregate metrics, even if it loses individual tests. The AMD chip’s strengths lie in its 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and quad-channel LPDDR5X support, which may benefit memory-intensive workloads not fully captured in these benchmarks. For users with specific needs in integer-heavy tasks, such as certain data processing or compilation workloads, the AMD processor’s 20.2% advantage in integer math could be decisive.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is better suited for users who require maximum performance in rendering, single-threaded applications, and general desktop use. Its higher core count (14 versus 8) and boost clock (5.10 GHz versus 5.00 GHz) contribute to its benchmark success. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388, with its 16 threads and superior memory bandwidth, is a viable option for mobile or memory-sensitive environments, though the data shows it trails in most measurable performance categories. Ultimately, the Intel part wins on sheer performance breadth, while the AMD chip offers a specific niche advantage.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 | Intel Core Ultra 5 245 |

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

| Cores | 8 | 14 |

| Threads | 16 | 14 |

| Base Clock | 3.60 GHz | 3.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 5.10 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP11 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Arrow Lake |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Die Size | 2x 70.6 mm² | 243 mm² |

| Transistors | Not listed | 17,800 million |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 32 MB (shared) | 24 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | LPDDR5X | DDR5 |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 8060S | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2026-01-05 | 2025-01-06 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | $270 |