AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 vs Intel Core 5 320 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a stark contrast between the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 and the Intel Core 5 320. Across the eleven recorded PassMark tests, the AMD processor claims victory in nine, while the Intel part takes two. The margins are not subtle; the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 dominates in nearly every compute-heavy workload, often by triple-digit percentage deltas.

The largest gap appears in integer math. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 152414, while the Intel Core 5 320 manages 32323. That is a 371.5% advantage for the AMD chip, the single biggest delta in the entire head-to-head set. Data compression shows a similar story: 554760 versus 148779, a 272.9% lead. Extended instructions follow with 45666 against 13262, a 244.3% margin. Random string sorting goes to AMD at 59487 versus 18038, a 229.8% difference.

Multithreaded performance is equally one-sided. The passmark_multithread result gives AMD 45231 and Intel 15450, a 192.8% advantage. The find prime numbers test shows 320 versus 110, a 190.9% gap. Data encryption lands at 27784 for AMD and 10984 for Intel, a 152.9% lead. Physics follows with 2887 against 1221, a 136.4% margin, and floating point math closes the AMD win set at 99548 versus 42440, a 134.6% advantage.

The only victories for the Intel Core 5 320 come in single-threaded workloads. In both passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread, Intel scores 4045 against AMD's 3927. That is a 2.9% lead for Intel. It is a narrow edge, but it is consistent across the two identical test entries. The data shows that for lightly threaded tasks, the Intel chip is slightly faster, whereas for anything that scales across cores, threads, or wide instruction sets, the AMD part is fundamentally in another class.

Looking at the broader database context, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 sits at the 96th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 90541. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 654 at 90717 (0.2% behind), the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX at 91199 (0.7% behind), and the Intel Xeon w7-2575X at 88172 (2.7% ahead of that rival). The Intel Core 5 320, by contrast, sits at the 72nd percentile with an average score of 18023. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 at 17994 (0.2% behind), the Intel Core 5 120U at 17898 (0.7% behind), and the Intel Core i5-1334U at 18154 (0.7% ahead). The gap between the two processors' average scores, 90541 versus 18023, is roughly fivefold, which aligns with the multithreaded test results.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in multithreaded performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 wins decisively. In passmark_multithread, it scores 45231 against the Intel Core 5 320's 15450, a 192.8% advantage.

Q: Does the Intel Core 5 320 win any benchmark?

A: Yes. It wins both single-thread tests. In passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread, it scores 4045 versus 3927 for the AMD chip, a 2.9% lead.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest gap is in passmark_integer_math. AMD scores 152414, Intel scores 32323, giving AMD a 371.5% lead.

Q: How do the two processors compare in data compression?

A: AMD leads heavily. The passmark_data_compression result is 554760 for AMD and 148779 for Intel, a 272.9% difference.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has an average benchmark score of 90541. The Intel Core 5 320 has an average benchmark score of 18023.

Q: How do the two processors rank against all CPUs?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 sits at the 96th percentile. The Intel Core 5 320 sits at the 72nd percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses the Zen 5 architecture under the Strix Halo codename, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core 5 320 uses the Wildcat Lake codename, built on a 3 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The process node difference is minor in terms of raw numbers, but the architectural scale is not.

Core counts diverge sharply. The AMD chip has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel chip has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no simultaneous multithreading. That alone explains much of the multithreaded performance gap. The AMD part has twice the cores and four times the threads.

Cache hierarchies are also very different. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 allocates 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3. The Intel Core 5 320 has 192 KB of L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The L3 difference is substantial: 64 MB versus 6 MB. The AMD chip's larger shared cache supports its wide multithreaded workloads.

Memory architecture adds another layer of separation. The AMD chip supports LPDDR5X over a quad-channel memory bus, yielding a memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. The Intel chip supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, but over a single-channel bus, with memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. That is a 4.3x difference in theoretical bandwidth, which matters for data-heavy workloads like compression and encryption. ECC memory is supported on the AMD part, not on the Intel part.

PCIe lanes also differ. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The Intel Core 5 320 provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). Both use Gen 4, but the lane count favors AMD. Integrated graphics differ as well: the AMD part uses the Radeon 8060S, while the Intel part uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every core specification field. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core 5 320 has 6 cores and 6 threads. Base clocks are 3.20 GHz for AMD and 1.50 GHz for Intel. Boost clocks are 5.00 GHz for AMD and 4.60 GHz for Intel. The TDP is 55 watts for AMD and 15 watts for Intel.

Sockets are incompatible: AMD Socket FP11 for the AMD part, Intel BGA 1516 for the Intel part. Process nodes are 4 nm (TSMC) for AMD and 3 nm (Intel) for Intel. The AMD die size is listed as 2x 70.6 mm², while the Intel die size is not recorded in the database.

Memory support differs in type, channel count, and bandwidth. AMD supports LPDDR5X only, quad-channel, at 256.0 GB/s. Intel supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, single-channel, at 59.7 GB/s. ECC is available on AMD, not on Intel. PCIe is Gen 4 for both, but AMD has 16 lanes versus Intel's 6 lanes.

Integrated graphics differ: Radeon 8060S on AMD, Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) on Intel. Both processors are locked, with multiplier unlocked set to false. Release dates differ: the AMD part is dated 2026-01-05, the Intel part 2026-04-15. The Intel Core 5 320 has a launch MSRP of $340; the AMD part has no launch MSRP recorded. Part numbers are 100-000001979 for AMD and SAE3H for Intel.

The Verdict

The data points to two very different target workloads. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is built for heavy parallel compute. Its 12 cores, 24 threads, 64 MB of L3, quad-channel memory, and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth deliver 192.8% higher multithreaded scores and 371.5% higher integer math scores than the Intel Core 5 320. The 96th percentile ranking and average score of 90541 place it among high-end workstation-class parts, close to the Intel Xeon 654 and AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX.

The Intel Core 5 320 is a low-power mobile part. Its 15 watt TDP, 6 cores, 6 threads, and single-channel memory cap its throughput. The 72nd percentile ranking and average score of 18023 put it alongside older desktop parts like the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 and Intel Core i5-1334U. Its only recorded win is a 2.9% edge in single-threaded tests.

For workloads that scale across threads, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is the clear choice. For tasks that are purely single-threaded, the Intel Core 5 320 offers a marginal advantage. The rest of the benchmark record favors AMD by wide margins. The data does not show any workload category, beyond single-thread, where the Intel chip comes close.