AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 vs Intel Core 5 120UL Comparison

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 and Intel Core 5 120UL occupy different tiers of the processor market, and the recorded benchmark data reflects a substantial performance gulf. The AMD part, a 12-core Zen 5 mobile processor, delivers results that place it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs tested, while the Intel Core 5 120UL, a 10-core Raptor Lake desktop chip, sits at the 68th percentile. Across every head-to-head test in the database, the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 wins, with margins ranging from 88.8% in single-threaded work to over 777% in extended instruction throughput.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most lopsided result appears in the PassMark extended instructions test, where the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 45,666 against the Core 5 120UL’s 5,203. That is a 777.7% advantage, indicating a massive difference in SIMD and specialized instruction execution capability. The Zen 5 architecture’s wider execution resources and higher clock ceiling are the likely drivers, though the data itself only shows the outcome.

Data compression also heavily favors the AMD chip. The Ryzen AI Max+ 392 records 554,760 in PassMark data compression, versus 109,090 for the Intel part, a 408.5% delta. This workload benefits from the AMD processor’s 24 threads and 64 MB of shared L3 cache, which allows more data to remain resident for rapid re-use. The Intel chip, with 12 threads and 12 MB of L3, falls far behind.

Prime number finding shows a 580.9% gap, with the AMD chip scoring 320 versus 47 for the Intel Core 5 120UL. Integer math follows at 300.5%, with scores of 152,414 and 38,060 respectively. Floating-point math is similarly one-sided: the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 99,548, while the Intel chip manages 26,311, a 278.4% difference. Random string sorting, a test sensitive to memory latency and cache hierarchy, sees the AMD part score 59,487 against 13,610, a 337.1% margin.

The multithreaded PassMark score, often used as a proxy for overall throughput, shows the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 at 45,231 versus the Core 5 120UL at 10,558. That is a 328.4% advantage. The physics test, which simulates rigid body dynamics, shows a 257.7% gap (2,887 versus 807). Data encryption favors the AMD chip by 261.5%, with scores of 27,784 and 7,685.

Even in single-thread performance, where the Intel chip’s 4.60 GHz boost clock might seem competitive, the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 wins decisively. Its PassMark single-thread score is 3,927, while the Core 5 120UL scores 2,080, an 88.8% lead for the AMD part. This result is notable because the Intel processor has a higher boost clock on paper, yet the Zen 5 core’s per- instruction efficiency delivers a nearly 90% advantage in this metric.

The aggregate average benchmark score reinforces the pattern. The Ryzen AI Max+ 392 averages 90,541 across all recorded tests, while the Intel Core 5 120UL averages 13,594. For context, the AMD chip’s nearest rivals in the database are the Intel Xeon 654 (average score 90,717, delta -0.2%), the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX (91,199, delta -0.7%), the Intel Xeon w7-2575X (88,172, delta 2.7%), and the Intel Xeon 6736P (87,864, delta 3%). The Intel Core 5 120UL, by contrast, sits near the Intel Core i3-12100F (13,494, delta 0.7%), the Intel Core 3 N355 (13,492, delta 0.8%), and the Intel Core i5-9500 (13,452, delta 1.1%). The Core 5 120UL is slightly ahead of the i3-12100F and N355 but trails the Core 3 304 by 1.1%. This places the two processors in entirely different performance strata, with the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 competing against workstation-class Xeons and the Core 5 120UL trading blows with entry-level desktop chips.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the majority of head-to-head benchmark tests?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 wins all 11 recorded head-to-head tests, with the Intel Core 5 120UL recording zero wins.

Q: What is the smallest performance gap between the two in any benchmark?

A: The smallest gap is in PassMark single-thread performance, where the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 leads by 88.8% with a score of 3,927 versus 2,080 for the Intel Core 5 120UL.

Q: How does the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 compare to its nearest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The AMD part averages 90,541, which is 0.2% behind the Intel Xeon 654 (90,717), 0.7% behind the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX (91,199), 2.7% ahead of the Intel Xeon w7-2575X (88,172), and 3% ahead of the Intel Xeon 6736P (87,864).

Q: Where does the Intel Core 5 120UL rank among its nearest competitors?

A: The Intel part averages 13,594, putting it 0.7% ahead of the Intel Core i3-12100F (13,494), 0.8% ahead of the Intel Core 3 N355 (13,492), 1.1% ahead of the Intel Core i5-9500 (13,452), and 1.1% behind the Intel Core 3 304 (13,745).

Q: What is the largest single benchmark margin between the two processors?

A: The largest margin is in PassMark extended instructions, where the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 leads by 777.7%, scoring 45,666 versus 5,203 for the Intel Core 5 120UL.

Q: How do the processors compare in multithreaded throughput?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 45,231 in PassMark multithread, a 328.4% advantage over the Intel Core 5 120UL’s 10,558.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is designed for workloads that demand high compute throughput, and its benchmark results confirm that positioning. Its average score of 90,541 places it among workstation-class processors, outperforming the Intel Xeon w7-2575X by 2.7% and the Intel Xeon 6736P by 3%, while sitting within 0.7% of the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX. The 96th percentile ranking across all CPUs indicates that this processor sits near the top of the database’s performance distribution.

The Intel Core 5 120UL, with an average score of 13,594, belongs to a different category entirely. Its 68th percentile ranking and its nearest rivals (the Core i3-12100F, Core 3 N355, Core i5-9500, and Core 3 304) all fall within a narrow band of 13,452 to 13,745. This processor is suitable for basic desktop tasks that do not scale with core count or high memory bandwidth, but the recorded data shows it cannot compete with the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 in any measured workload.

For users who need maximum multicore performance, heavy integer or floating-point math, or rapid data compression and encryption, the AMD part is the clear choice. The single-thread gap of 88.8% also means that even lightly threaded applications will run significantly faster on the Ryzen AI Max+ 392. The Intel Core 5 120UL, on the other hand, consumes less power with a 15 W TDP versus 55 W, and uses a dual-channel memory bus, which may suit low-power desktop builds where absolute performance is not the priority. The benchmark data does not support any scenario where the Intel chip outperforms the AMD chip, so the selection comes down to power envelope and platform requirements rather than speed.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every core specification. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core 5 120UL has 10 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks are 3.20 GHz for the AMD part and 1.30 GHz for the Intel part. Boost clocks are 5.00 GHz and 4.60 GHz, respectively.

Thermal design power differs significantly: 55 W for the AMD chip versus 15 W for the Intel chip. The AMD processor uses AMD Socket FP11, while the Intel processor uses Intel Socket 1700. Memory support differs as well: the AMD chip supports LPDDR5X with a quad-channel bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel chip supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and no recorded bandwidth figure. ECC memory is supported on the AMD chip but not on the Intel chip.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 provides 16 lanes of Gen 4 PCIe (CPU only), while the Intel Core 5 120UL provides 8 lanes of Gen 4 PCIe (CPU only). The integrated graphics are different: the AMD part uses Radeon 8060S, and the Intel part uses Iris Xe Graphics 80EU. The AMD chip has a release date of 2026-01-05, while the Intel chip launched on 2024-04-07. Both processors have locked multipliers, and neither has a recorded launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

The foundational architectures are distinct. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is built on Zen 5 under the codename Strix Halo, fabricated on a 4 nm process by TSMC. The Intel Core 5 120UL uses Raptor Lake architecture under the codename Raptor Lake-PS, fabricated on a 10 nm process by Intel. The AMD chip has a die size of 2x 70.6 mm², while the Intel chip has no recorded die size.

Cache hierarchies show structural differences. Both processors have 80 KB of L1 per core. L2 differs: the AMD chip has 1 MB per core, while the Intel chip has 1.25 MB per core. L3 cache is dramatically different: the AMD part has 64 MB shared, while the Intel part has 12 MB shared. This 52 MB difference in shared cache likely contributes to the AMD chip’s large leads in data compression and random string sorting, as those workloads benefit from larger resident data sets.

The AMD processor integrates a Radeon 8060S GPU, while the Intel part integrates Iris Xe Graphics 80EU. The AMD chip also supports ECC memory, which the Intel chip does not. The memory controllers differ in channel count (quad-channel versus dual-channel) and supported memory types (LPDDR5X versus DDR4/DDR5). The market segments also differ: the AMD chip is classified as Mobile, while the Intel chip is classified as Desktop, despite both being used in systems that may have similar form factors.

The production status for both is Active, and both have locked multipliers. The Intel part has no recorded part number, while the AMD chip uses part number 100-000001979. The recorded data shows that the architectural choices, particularly the larger L3 cache, higher core count, and faster base clock, translate directly into the benchmark margins observed across all 11 head-to-head tests.