AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 vs Intel Core 5 211E Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the two processors compare in overall average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 records an average benchmark score of 90541, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 5 211E averages 37829, landing in the 86th percentile. The AMD part sits roughly 2.4 times higher in raw average score.

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

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 wins 9 of the 11 recorded head-to-head tests. The Intel Core 5 211E wins only 2, both of which are single-threaded tests (passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread), where it leads by 2 percent.

Q: What is the largest margin of victory in any single benchmark between these two?

A: The largest delta is in passmark_find_prime_numbers, where the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 320 versus Intel's 43, a difference of 644.2 percent. This is an extreme outlier compared to other test deltas, which range from 2 to 111.5 percent.

Q: How does memory bandwidth differ between the two platforms?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses quad-channel LPDDR5X memory with a recorded bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. The Intel Core 5 211E uses dual-channel DDR4 or DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The AMD platform offers over three times the memory bandwidth.

Q: What are the process nodes for each chip?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is fabricated on a 4 nm process by TSMC, with a die size listed as 2x 70.6 mm². The Intel Core 5 211E uses Intel's 10 nm process with a 257 mm² die. The AMD chip is built on a smaller node and uses a smaller total die area.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock, and what are the base clocks?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel Core 5 211E has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. AMD leads in both base and boost frequencies.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data splits the workloads cleanly between the two chips. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 dominates every multi-threaded and compute-heavy category. Its wins include data compression (554760 versus 346757), data encryption (27784 versus 17938), extended instructions (45666 versus 21592), floating point math (99548 versus 66402), integer math (152414 versus 88117), multithread score (45231 versus 23833), physics (2887 versus 702), and random string sorting (59487 versus 34308). The deltas range from 49.9 percent in floating point math to 644.2 percent in prime number finding. These are not narrow margins; they indicate a processor that is categorically faster in sustained parallel workloads.

The Intel Core 5 211E wins exactly one category: single-threaded performance. It scores 4006 in passmark_single_thread, while the AMD chip scores 3927, a 2 percent advantage for Intel. This is a slim lead, but it is consistent across both single-thread entries in the database. For workloads that depend primarily on one core, such as lightly threaded legacy applications or certain interactive tasks, the Intel part holds a small edge. However, this is the only area where Intel shows superiority, and the margin is minor compared to AMD's leads elsewhere.

The use-case split is therefore stark. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is the choice for rendering, compilation, data processing, scientific computing, or any task that scales across cores and threads. The Intel Core 5 211E has a narrow single-thread advantage, which may matter for specific software that cannot utilize multiple cores effectively. But the data suggests that the AMD part's multi-threaded wins are so large that they overwhelm Intel's single-thread lead in almost any mixed workload.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses the Zen 5 architecture under the Strix Halo codename, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It packs 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core 5 211E uses the Bartlett Lake codename, built on a 10 nm process at Intel, with 10 cores and 16 threads. The AMD chip has 2 more cores and 8 more threads, which directly contributes to its multithreaded dominance.

Cache hierarchies differ significantly. Both chips list 80 KB of L1 cache per core. The AMD part has 1 MB of L2 per core, while Intel doubles that to 2 MB per core. However, in L3 cache, AMD has 64 MB shared, while Intel has only 20 MB shared. The AMD chip's larger L3 pool likely aids in data-heavy workloads, while Intel's larger per-core L2 may help with certain latency-sensitive tasks.

Memory architecture is a major differentiator. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 supports only LPDDR5X memory in a quad-channel configuration, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Core 5 211E supports both DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration, delivering 76.8 GB/s. This is a 3.3x advantage in memory bandwidth for AMD, which explains its large leads in data compression, encryption, and sorting tasks that are memory-bound.

The integrated graphics also differ. AMD pairs the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 with a Radeon 8060S, while Intel uses UHD Graphics 730. The database does not provide graphics benchmarks, but the product positioning suggests AMD's solution targets more demanding visual workloads. PCIe connectivity differs as well: AMD offers Gen 4 with 16 lanes, while Intel offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes. Intel's PCIe generation is newer, though the practical impact depends on peripheral support. Both chips support ECC memory. AMD uses the FP11 socket, while Intel uses Socket 1700.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two processors, based solely on the recorded data:

• Cores: AMD has 12, Intel has 10
• Threads: AMD has 24, Intel has 16
• Base clock: AMD at 3.20 GHz, Intel at 2.70 GHz
• Boost clock: AMD at 5.00 GHz, Intel at 4.90 GHz
• TDP: AMD at 55 W, Intel at 65 W
• Socket: AMD Socket FP11 versus Intel Socket 1700
• Codename: Strix Halo versus Bartlett Lake
• Generation: Ryzen AI Max (Zen 5 Strix Halo) versus Core 5 (Bartlett Lake)
• Process node: 4 nm TSMC versus 10 nm Intel
• Die size: 2x 70.6 mm² versus 257 mm²
• L2 cache: 1 MB per core versus 2 MB per core
• L3 cache: 64 MB shared versus 20 MB shared
• Memory support: LPDDR5X only versus DDR4 and DDR5
• Memory bus: Quad-channel versus dual-channel
• Memory bandwidth: 256.0 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s
• PCIe: Gen 4, 16 lanes versus Gen 5, 16 lanes
• Integrated graphics: Radeon 8060S versus UHD Graphics 730
• Market segment: Mobile versus Desktop
• Release date: 2026-01-05 versus 2025-01-12
• Launch MSRP: Intel listed at $221, AMD has no recorded value
• Part number: 100-000001979 versus SRQERQ65F

Fields that match: both have 80 KB L1 per core, both support ECC memory, both have 16 PCIe lanes, both are Active in production status, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a consistent pattern of AMD dominance. The largest win for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is in passmark_find_prime_numbers, where it scores 320 against Intel's 43, a delta of 644.2 percent. This test is highly sensitive to integer arithmetic and memory latency, and AMD's combination of more cores, higher clocks, and larger L3 cache produces an exceptional result.

In passmark_extended_instructions, AMD scores 45666 versus Intel's 21592, a 111.5 percent lead. This test exercises SIMD and specialized instruction sets, where AMD's Zen 5 architecture shows a clear advantage. The passmark_multithread test shows AMD at 45231 versus Intel's 23833, a 89.8 percent difference. This is the broadest measure of parallel performance and confirms that the AMD chip delivers nearly double the throughput.

The physics test shows AMD at 2887 versus Intel's 702, a 311.3 percent lead. Physics simulations often rely on floating point and memory bandwidth, both of which favor AMD heavily. In passmark_integer_math, AMD scores 152414 versus 88117, a 73 percent lead. Random string sorting shows AMD at 59487 versus 34308, a 73.4 percent lead, which reflects the memory bandwidth advantage. Data compression shows AMD at 554760 versus 346757, a 60 percent lead. Data encryption shows AMD at 27784 versus 17938, a 54.9 percent lead. Floating point math shows AMD at 99548 versus 66402, a 49.9 percent lead.

The only Intel wins are in the two single-thread tests, both showing 4006 versus 3927, a 2 percent lead. This is a small margin, but it is consistent. In every other recorded benchmark, the AMD processor wins by double-digit percentages, with several exceeding 100 percent. The average benchmark score reflects this: AMD at 90541 versus Intel at 37829.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 outperforms the Intel Core 5 211E in 9 of 11 head-to-head benchmarks, with margins ranging from 49.9 percent to 644.2 percent. Its average benchmark score of 90541 places it in the 96th percentile, while Intel's 37829 sits in the 86th percentile. The AMD chip offers more cores, more threads, higher clocks, a smaller process node, and over three times the memory bandwidth.

The Intel Core 5 211E holds a narrow single-thread lead of 2 percent, which may appeal to users running software that is strictly single-threaded. It also has a lower launch MSRP of $221, though the AMD part has no recorded MSRP for comparison. Intel's PCIe Gen 5 support is a forward-looking feature, and its larger L2 cache per core may help in specific latency-sensitive scenarios.

For any workload that engages multiple cores, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is the stronger processor based on the recorded measurements. Its wins in multithread, physics, encryption, and extended instructions are decisive. The Intel part is only preferable in the narrow case where single-thread performance is the sole criterion. The benchmark data does not support choosing Intel for general-purpose or parallel computing tasks.