AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 vs Intel Core 5 213PE Comparison

FAQ

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

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 records an average benchmark score of 90,541, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 5 213PE averages 35,428, which puts it in the 85th percentile. The AMD part sits roughly 2.5 times higher in average score.

Q: Which chip wins the most head-to-head tests?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 takes 9 of the 11 recorded head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The Intel Core 5 213PE wins only the single-threaded PassMark tests, with a score of 4,060 versus 3,927.

Q: What is the largest performance gap in either direction?

A: The AMD chip leads by the widest margin in the PassMark find prime numbers test, scoring 320 against Intel's 114, a delta of 180.7%. The Intel chip's only lead is narrow, 3.3% in single-threaded performance.

Q: How do the memory subsystems differ between these two CPUs?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 supports LPDDR5X memory on a quad-channel bus with 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Core 5 213PE supports DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus with 76.8 GB/s of bandwidth. Both support ECC memory.

Q: What are the production and release timelines?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 was released on January 5, 2026, and the Intel Core 5 213PE followed on March 8, 2026. Both are listed as Active in production status. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $221; the AMD part has no recorded MSRP.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 5 213PE boosts to 5.20 GHz, which is higher than the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392's 5.00 GHz boost. However, the AMD chip has a higher base clock at 3.20 GHz versus Intel's 2.70 GHz.

Architecture Differences

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 contains 12 cores and 24 threads. The die is composed of two 70.6 mm² chiplets. The Intel Core 5 213PE uses the Bartlett Lake codename, built on a 10 nm process at Intel, with 8 cores and 16 threads.

Cache configurations differ substantially. Both parts share an 80 KB L1 per core. The AMD chip has 1 MB of L2 per core and 64 MB of shared L3. The Intel chip has 2 MB of L2 per core but only 24 MB of shared L3. The AMD part's larger L3 pool supports its higher multithreaded throughput.

Memory architecture follows different paths. AMD uses LPDDR5X over a quad-channel interface delivering 256.0 GB/s. Intel uses DDR4 or DDR5 over a dual-channel interface delivering 76.8 GB/s. That bandwidth gap shows up directly in data-heavy workloads.

PCIe support also differs. The AMD chip provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The Intel chip provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics differ as well: AMD pairs the CPU with a Radeon 8060S, while Intel uses UHD Graphics 730.

The sockets are incompatible: AMD uses Socket FP11, Intel uses Socket 1700. The AMD part targets the mobile segment, while the Intel part targets desktop. Production status for both is Active. The AMD processor is not multiplier-unlocked, nor is the Intel part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear pattern: the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 dominates the multithreaded and compute-heavy tests, while the Intel Core 5 213PE holds a slim lead in single-threaded work.

In PassMark data compression, AMD scores 554,760 against Intel's 298,804, a lead of 85.7%. Random string sorting shows the same delta of 85.7%, with AMD at 59,487 and Intel at 32,027. These two tests highlight the memory bandwidth advantage of the quad-channel LPDDR5X setup.

Data encryption shows AMD ahead by 74.6%, scoring 27,784 versus 15,916. Extended instructions favor AMD even more strongly: 45,666 against 19,565, a delta of 133.4%. The largest single gap appears in the find prime numbers test, where AMD scores 320 against 114, a delta of 180.7%. Prime number finding is sensitive to integer throughput, and AMD's 12-core, 24-thread configuration gives it a structural edge.

Floating point math results show AMD at 99,548 versus Intel's 68,587, a 45.1% advantage. Integer math follows with AMD at 152,414 versus 92,089, a 65.5% lead. The PassMark multithread score has AMD at 45,231 and Intel at 26,434, a delta of 71.1%. Physics simulation, which scales well with core count, shows AMD at 2,887 versus 1,624, a 77.8% lead.

The only Intel wins come in the two identical single-thread tests. Intel scores 4,060 in both passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread, against AMD's 3,927. That is a 3.3% advantage for Intel. The higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz likely explains this narrow edge, but it is the sole bright spot for the Intel part in this comparison.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification field.

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 | 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 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP11 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Codename | Strix Halo | 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 | Gen 5, 16 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 8060S | UHD Graphics 730 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

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

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $221 |

The AMD part uses 12 cores and 24 threads with a lower TDP of 55 W. The Intel part uses 8 cores and 16 threads with a higher TDP of 65 W. Despite the higher TDP, Intel's dual-channel memory bus provides only 30% of the bandwidth of AMD's quad-channel configuration.

The Verdict

The benchmark data makes the hierarchy clear. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 outperforms the Intel Core 5 213PE in 9 of 11 recorded comparisons, often by very large margins. The average benchmark score of 90,541 versus 35,428 reflects a processor that sits two tiers higher in overall capability. The percentile ranking of 96 versus 85 confirms that the AMD part is positioned among much faster CPUs in the database.

The Intel Core 5 213PE does hold the single-threaded crown in this pairing. A score of 4,060 against 3,927 is a real, if modest, advantage. The higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz likely accounts for that edge. For workloads that depend on a single core and cannot use additional threads, the Intel part is the better choice.

However, the AMD part's advantages are not marginal. In multithreaded tests, the deltas range from 45.1% to 180.7%. The 64 MB of shared L3 cache, quad-channel memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s, and 12-core, 24-thread configuration create a structural advantage that the Intel part cannot overcome. The AMD chip also does this at a lower TDP of 55 W versus 65 W.

The launch MSRP of the Intel part is $221, while the AMD part has no recorded MSRP. The data does not include pricing for the AMD chip, so no direct cost comparison can be made from the database.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 wins every multithreaded workload in the recorded data. Data compression, encryption, extended instructions, prime number finding, floating point math, integer math, physics simulation, and random string sorting all go to the AMD part. The deltas range from 45.1% in floating point to 180.7% in prime numbers. Any workload that scales across cores or relies heavily on memory bandwidth will favor this chip. The 24 threads, 64 MB L3, and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth provide the foundation for these wins.

The Intel Core 5 213PE wins the single-threaded tests by 3.3%. This makes it the better option for lightly threaded applications where one core does most of the work. The 5.20 GHz boost clock gives it a frequency advantage over the AMD part's 5.00 GHz. The Intel chip also has a larger L2 cache per core at 2 MB versus 1 MB, which may help in latency-sensitive single-threaded tasks.

The Intel part has two additional structural advantages that do not appear in the head-to-head benchmarks. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, giving platform flexibility. It also provides PCIe Gen 5 lanes, which double the interconnect bandwidth of the AMD part's Gen 4 implementation. These features matter for desktop users building systems with current-generation storage or expansion cards.

The AMD part targets the mobile segment with a lower TDP and integrated Radeon 8060S graphics. The Intel part targets desktop with UHD Graphics 730. For a mobile workstation or high-performance laptop, the AMD chip's combination of compute throughput and lower power draw is the stronger fit. For a desktop system where single-thread speed and PCIe Gen 5 connectivity are priorities, the Intel part has a defined role.