AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 vs Intel Core 5 210H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a comprehensive sweep for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 across all eleven shared PassMark tests. The most dramatic separation appears in prime number computation, where the AMD part scores 320 against the Intel Core 5 210H's 53, a 503.8 percent advantage. This type of workload, which relies heavily on integer throughput and branch handling, demonstrates the architectural gap between the two processors.

Extended instruction performance also favors the AMD chip heavily. The Ryzen AI Max+ 392 delivers 45,666 points versus 13,370 for the Intel part, a 241.6 percent delta. This suggests the AMD processor has substantially more headroom for workloads that use advanced instruction sets, such as AVX-512 or similar extended operations. The Intel Core 5 210H, based on Raptor Lake, does not appear to match this capability in the measured results.

Physics calculations show another large gap. The AMD processor scores 2,887, while the Intel chip manages 1,040, a 177.6 percent difference. Physics workloads often stress floating-point units and memory subsystems simultaneously, and the AMD part's advantage here aligns with its wider memory interface and larger cache allocation.

In floating-point math, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 records 99,548 points against 45,057 for the Intel Core 5 210H, a 120.9 percent lead. Integer math follows a similar pattern: 152,414 versus 61,503, a 147.8 percent delta. Multithread performance shows the same 147.8 percent advantage, with scores of 45,231 and 18,252 respectively. Data compression results in a 154.7 percent edge for AMD, at 554,760 versus 217,805. Random string sorting gives AMD a 153.7 percent lead, 59,487 to 23,451. Data encryption shows a 128 percent difference, 27,784 to 12,187.

The single-thread comparison is the closest contest. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 3,927, while the Intel Core 5 210H scores 3,539, an 11 percent advantage. This narrow margin indicates that while the AMD part leads in every measured category, the per-core performance difference is modest. The Intel processor's higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz, though slightly below the AMD's 5.00 GHz, helps keep single-threaded performance within striking distance.

The average benchmark scores confirm the overall positioning. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 holds an average score of 90,541 and sits in the 96th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Intel Core 5 210H averages 24,872 and ranks in the 77th percentile. The AMD chip's nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Xeon 654 at 90,717 (0.2 percent behind the AMD) and the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX at 91,199 (0.7 percent behind). The Intel Core 5 210H's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-13620H at 24,911 (0.2 percent behind) and the AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX at 24,822 (0.2 percent ahead).

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses the Zen 5 architecture with the Strix Halo codename, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core 5 210H uses Raptor Lake, specifically the Raptor Lake-H variant from the Raptor Lake Refresh generation, manufactured on Intel's 10 nm process. The process node difference alone, 4 nm versus 10 nm, explains part of the power efficiency and density disparity.

Core counts differ substantially. The AMD part provides 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel part offers 8 cores and 12 threads. The AMD processor also has a higher base clock at 3.20 GHz compared to 2.20 GHz, and a higher boost clock at 5.00 GHz versus 4.80 GHz. These clock advantages compound with the core count difference to produce the large multithreaded gaps seen in the benchmarks.

Cache configurations tell a clear story. Both processors have 80 KB of L1 cache per core. The L2 cache differs: the AMD chip has 1 MB per core, while the Intel chip has 2 MB per core. However, the L3 cache is where the AMD part dominates, with 64 MB shared across all cores, against only 12 MB shared for the Intel part. The larger L3 cache on the AMD chip likely contributes to its strong performance in data compression and sorting workloads, where repeated access to working sets benefits from larger on-die storage.

Memory support also diverges. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses LPDDR5X memory over a quad-channel bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Core 5 210H supports both DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, though the database does not record a bandwidth figure. The AMD part's memory bandwidth is a significant advantage for memory-intensive workloads, and it also supports ECC memory, which the Intel part does not.

PCI Express connectivity differs as well. The AMD processor provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes, while the Intel processor provides Gen 5 with 8 lanes. The Intel part's newer PCIe generation offers higher per-lane bandwidth, but the AMD part has more lanes available for expansion.

Integrated graphics represent another major divergence. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 includes a Radeon 8060S iGPU, while the Intel Core 5 210H includes Iris Xe Graphics with 48 execution units. The database does not provide direct graphics benchmarks, so the performance relationship remains qualitative.

The release dates place these parts in different market windows. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 launched on 2026-01-05, while the Intel Core 5 210H launched on 2024-12-17. Both remain in active production status. The AMD part carries the part number 100-000001979 and uses the AMD Socket FP11. The Intel part uses Intel BGA 1744 and carries the part number SRQ6RQ5MN. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 wins every benchmark category in the head-to-head comparison. Its largest advantages appear in prime number finding, extended instructions, physics, and floating-point math. These results indicate strength in scientific computing, numerical simulation, and workloads that can exploit wide SIMD units and high memory bandwidth.

The multithread score of 45,231 versus 18,252 suggests the AMD part is well suited for heavily parallel workloads such as video encoding, 3D rendering, and large-scale data processing. The 24 threads provide substantial parallel headroom, and the 64 MB L3 cache helps keep multiple threads fed with data.

The Intel Core 5 210H, despite losing all eleven benchmarks, shows its best relative performance in single-threaded tasks. The 11 percent deficit in single-thread score is far smaller than the gaps in multithreaded or memory-heavy workloads. This suggests the Intel part remains competitive for lightly threaded applications where clock speed matters more than core count or cache size. The 4.80 GHz boost clock helps in this regard.

The Intel part also supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, which offers system designers flexibility in platform choices. Its PCIe Gen 5 support, while limited to 8 lanes, provides higher per-lane bandwidth for NVMe storage or discrete GPUs that can use it.

For users prioritizing raw compute throughput, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is the clear choice based on the recorded data. For scenarios where single-threaded responsiveness and platform flexibility matter more, the Intel Core 5 210H has a narrower but still present case.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates that the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 outperforms the Intel Core 5 210H across every measured category. The average benchmark score of 90,541 places the AMD part in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel part's 24,872 average places it in the 77th percentile. The AMD processor's nearest rivals are workstation-class Xeon and high-end Ryzen 9 parts, while the Intel processor competes with mid-range mobile chips from previous generations.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 delivers 147.8 percent higher multithread performance, 120.9 percent higher floating-point performance, and 241.6 percent higher extended instruction performance compared to the Intel Core 5 210H. The single-thread advantage of 11 percent, while smaller, still favors the AMD part.

The Intel Core 5 210H holds a launch MSRP of $342. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has no recorded launch price in the database.

The data supports a clear hierarchy: the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is a high-end mobile processor designed for demanding parallel workloads, while the Intel Core 5 210H is a mid-range mobile part for mainstream tasks. Any workload that benefits from more cores, more cache, or higher memory bandwidth will favor the AMD processor significantly.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core 5 210H has 8 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What is the single-thread performance difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 3,927 in the PassMark single-thread test, which is 11 percent higher than the Intel Core 5 210H's score of 3,539.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 5 210H does not.

Q: How do the integrated graphics compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses a Radeon 8060S integrated GPU, while the Intel Core 5 210H uses Iris Xe Graphics with 48 execution units. Direct graphics benchmarks are not recorded in the database.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s over a quad-channel LPDDR5X bus. The Intel Core 5 210H uses a dual-channel bus supporting DDR4 and DDR5, but no bandwidth figure is recorded.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, while the Intel Core 5 210H has a boost clock of 4.80 GHz.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 | Intel Core 5 210H |

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

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Raptor Lake |

| Codename | Strix Halo | Raptor Lake-H |

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

| Process Node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Cores | 12 | 8 |

| Threads | 24 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 3.20 GHz | 2.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 45 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP11 | Intel BGA 1744 |

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

| L3 Cache | 64 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5 |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | Not recorded |

| 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 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $342 |

| Part Number | 100-000001979 | SRQ6RQ5MN |