AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 vs Intel Core 5 213PE Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 records an average benchmark score of 56273, placing it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 5 213PE averages 35428, which puts it in the 85th percentile.

Q: How large is the performance gap in multi-core rendering tests?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 scores 36064 versus 22468 for the Intel Core 5 213PE, a 60.5% advantage for the AMD part. The R20 multi-core test shows a similar 60.5% delta (15146 against 9436).

Q: Does the Intel processor win any benchmark category?

A: Yes. The Intel Core 5 213PE wins the PassMark single-thread test with a score of 4060, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 scores 4028, a 0.8% edge for Intel. This result appears in both the "single_thread" and "singlethread" entries.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core 5 213PE has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 supports quad-channel LPDDR5X memory with a bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. The Intel Core 5 213PE uses dual-channel DDR4 or DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s.

Q: What are the release dates for these two processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 was released on January 5, 2025. The Intel Core 5 213PE has a release date of March 8, 2026.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 is built on the Zen 5 architecture using the Strix Halo codename, manufactured on a 4 nm process by TSMC. The die consists of two separate chips, each measuring 70.6 mm². The Intel Core 5 213PE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and is fabricated on Intel's 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry. These process differences likely contribute to the substantial performance gap observed across nearly all benchmarks.

Cache organization differs notably between the two. Both processors feature 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 cache per core for the AMD part, but the Intel part has 2 MB of L2 cache per core. The shared L3 cache shows a significant divergence: the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 has 64 MB shared across all cores, while the Intel Core 5 213PE has 24 MB shared. This 40 MB difference in L3 capacity could influence workloads with large working sets.

Memory architecture also separates these designs. The AMD chip uses quad-channel LPDDR5X with 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while Intel employs dual-channel DDR4 or DDR5 with 76.8 GB/s. Both support ECC memory. The PCIe implementation differs as well: AMD provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes, while Intel provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes. The integrated graphics differ completely, with AMD using Radeon 8050S and Intel using UHD Graphics 730.

The AMD processor belongs to the Ryzen AI Max generation and uses the AMD Socket FP11, targeting the mobile market segment. The Intel processor belongs to the Core 5 generation, uses Intel Socket 1700, and targets the desktop market segment. Both processors have locked multipliers, meaning they are not unlocked for overclocking. The AMD part has a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel part runs a base clock of 2.70 GHz and boosts to 5.20 GHz. Despite the lower boost clock on AMD, the benchmark results show AMD winning decisively in most tests.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a comprehensive sweep for the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 across 15 of the 17 recorded tests, with only the PassMark single-thread test going to Intel by a narrow margin. The Cinebench suite reveals consistent 60.5% to 60.8% advantages for AMD across R15, R20, and R23, in both single-core and multi-core variants. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, AMD scores 3635 against 2264 for Intel, a 60.6% delta. The single-core R15 test shows 513 versus 319, a 60.8% delta.

The largest single margin appears in the PassMark find prime numbers test, where AMD scores 316 against Intel's 114, a 177.2% advantage. This extreme delta suggests the AMD architecture handles integer-heavy primality testing with far greater efficiency. The PassMark extended instructions test also shows a massive gap: AMD scores 38716 versus 19565, a 97.9% difference. This nearly doubles the Intel result and points to significantly better SIMD or instruction-level throughput.

More moderate advantages appear in floating-point math, where AMD scores 90594 against 68587, a 32.1% delta. This remains a solid win but is the smallest margin among AMD's victories. The PassMark physics test shows AMD at 2761 versus 1624, a 70% gap. Data compression favors AMD at 487145 versus 298804, a 63% delta. Integer math shows AMD at 146519 versus 92089, a 59.1% advantage. Random string sorting goes to AMD at 53113 versus 32027, a 65.8% delta. Data encryption shows AMD at 25097 versus 15916, a 57.7% margin. Multithread performance gives AMD 41737 versus 26434, a 57.9% edge.

The single PassMark single-thread result flips the pattern. Intel scores 4060 against AMD's 4028, a 0.8% delta in Intel's favor. This narrow win suggests that for purely single-threaded, non-Cinebench workloads, the Intel chip's higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz can edge out AMD's 5.00 GHz maximum. However, the Cinebench single-core tests contradict this, with AMD winning by 60.5% in R23 and 60.8% in R15. The difference likely stems from the specific instruction mixes in each test, but the database records both outcomes without speculation.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 | Intel Core 5 213PE |

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

| Cores | 12 | 8 |

| Threads | 24 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 3.20 GHz | 2.70 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 5.20 GHz |

| TDP | 55 | 65 |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP11 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Codename | Strix Halo | Bartlett Lake |

| Generation | Ryzen AI Max (Zen 5 (Strix Halo)) | Core 5 (Bartlett Lake) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die Size | 2x 70.6 mm² | Not recorded |

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

| L3 Cache | 64 MB (shared) | 24 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5 |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 76.8 GB/s |

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

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 8050S | UHD Graphics 730 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2025-01-05 | 2026-03-08 |

| Part Number | 100-000001423 | SA4QG |

The launch MSRP for the Intel Core 5 213PE is $221. No launch MSRP is recorded for the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 wins decisively in every multi-threaded and most single-threaded workloads recorded. The 12-core, 24-thread configuration with 64 MB of L3 cache and 256.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth makes it the preferred choice for rendering tasks, as evidenced by the 60.5% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core. The 177.2% advantage in prime number finding and 97.9% lead in extended instructions indicates particular strength in mathematically intensive or vectorized code. Data compression, encryption, integer math, floating-point math, physics simulation, and random string sorting all favor AMD by margins ranging from 32.1% to 70%.

The Intel Core 5 213PE wins only the PassMark single-thread test, with a 0.8% margin. This narrow victory suggests that in lightweight, single-threaded applications that do not rely on the same instruction patterns as Cinebench, the Intel chip can match or slightly exceed AMD. The higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz likely contributes to this result. For desktop users on Socket 1700 with DDR4 or DDR5 support, the Intel processor also offers PCIe Gen 5 connectivity, which the AMD mobile part does not provide.

The market segments differ fundamentally. AMD targets mobile with a 55 TDP and quad-channel LPDDR5X, while Intel targets desktop with a 65 TDP and dual-channel DDR4 or DDR5. Users requiring ECC memory are covered by both options. The AMD part's integrated Radeon 8050S graphics are likely more capable for iGPU workloads than Intel's UHD Graphics 730, though the database does not record graphics benchmarks to confirm this.

The Verdict

The recorded data presents a clear picture: the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 outperforms the Intel Core 5 213PE in 15 of 17 benchmark tests, with average margins exceeding 60% in most Cinebench workloads and reaching 177.2% in prime number calculations. The AMD processor sits in the 91st percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 56273, while the Intel processor sits in the 85th percentile with 35428. The nearest rivals for AMD include the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 (0.1% lower score), Intel Core i9-14900HX (0.5% higher score), and AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX (0.5% lower score). The Intel Core 5 213PE's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-13700T (0.1% lower), Intel Core i7-12700KF (0.2% lower), and Intel Core i5-13600T (0.3% lower).

For workloads that depend on multi-core rendering, mathematical computation, data compression, or encryption, the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 is the superior choice based on every recorded benchmark. The 64 MB L3 cache, quad-channel memory, and 4 nm process from TSMC deliver results that the Intel 10 nm Bartlett Lake part cannot match. The Intel Core 5 213PE only shows a measurable advantage in PassMark's single-thread test, with a 0.8% delta, which is negligible in practical terms.

The AMD chip's mobile market segment and 55 TDP suggest it fits into high-performance laptops or compact systems, while the Intel desktop part with Socket 1700 suits traditional desktop builds. The Intel processor's PCIe Gen 5 support and dual-channel DDR4 or DDR5 memory compatibility offer platform flexibility, but the benchmark data shows no performance area where that flexibility translates into a computational win. Users prioritizing raw throughput across the tested workloads should select the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390. Users locked into the Intel Socket 1700 platform or requiring PCIe Gen 5 may still consider the Core 5 213PE, but they should expect the measured performance deficit documented in this database.