AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 245K Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a split decision across the PassMark suite, with the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K taking 6 of the 11 head-to-head tests and the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 winning 5. The margins, however, tell a more nuanced story than the win count alone.

AMD’s largest victory comes in integer math, where the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 152,414 against Intel’s 98,524, a commanding 54.7% advantage. This is the single biggest delta in the entire comparison. The AMD part also delivers a 21.4% lead in extended instructions (45,666 vs. 37,617) and a 20.9% edge in data compression (554,760 vs. 458,817). These three wins share a common theme: workloads that stress parallel integer throughput and wide data manipulation benefit heavily from AMD’s 24 threads.

The multithread score, a broader measure of parallel performance, goes to AMD at 45,231 versus 43,047, a modest 5.1% margin. Random string sorting also favors AMD, 59,487 to 55,098, an 8% advantage. These results suggest that while AMD wins the aggregate thread-heavy workloads, the margins are far slimmer than the integer math blowout might imply.

Intel counters with decisive wins in floating-point math, scoring 130,678 against AMD’s 99,548, a 23.8% lead. Prime number finding goes to Intel at 414 versus 320, a 22.7% margin. Single-thread performance favors Intel at 4,714 versus 3,927, a 16.7% gap, and data encryption shows Intel ahead at 33,286 compared to 27,784, a 16.5% edge. The physics test is closer, with Intel winning 3,081 to 2,887, a 6.3% margin.

The pattern is consistent: Intel’s higher clock speeds and stronger per-core efficiency dominate scalar and floating-point tasks, while AMD’s thread count advantage carries integer-heavy and compression workloads. The average benchmark score reflects this split, with AMD at 90,541 and Intel at 54,053, though this aggregate figure is heavily influenced by the benchmark mix and AMD’s inclusion of more tests overall.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. AMD’s Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is a mobile-focused Strix Halo part built on the Zen 5 architecture, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. Intel’s Core Ultra 5 245K is a desktop Arrow Lake-S chip using the Arrow Lake architecture on a 3 nm process, also from TSMC. The process node difference is small but measurable, with Intel holding a slight density advantage.

Core counts differ significantly. The AMD part has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel part has 14 cores but only 14 threads. This means Intel’s chip lacks simultaneous multithreading entirely, while AMD doubles its thread count. The cache hierarchy underscores the divergence: AMD allocates 80 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, with a shared 64 MB L3 pool. Intel provides 192 KB of L1 per core and 3 MB of L2 per core, but only 24 MB of shared L3. The larger L3 on AMD likely contributes to its data compression and extended instruction wins, where larger working sets benefit from the bigger cache. Intel’s larger per-core L1 and L2 support its single-thread strength.

Clock behavior also diverges. Intel lists a 4.20 GHz base and 5.20 GHz boost, while AMD lists 3.20 GHz base and 5.00 GHz boost. The power envelope is starkly different: Intel’s TDP is 125 watts versus AMD’s 55 watts. This makes the AMD part a low-power mobile chip, while Intel targets desktop sockets with higher thermal headroom. The socket choices reflect this, with AMD using Socket FP11 and Intel using Socket 1851.

Memory architecture adds another layer. AMD uses LPDDR5X with a quad-channel bus delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Intel uses DDR5 with a dual-channel bus at 102.4 GB/s. AMD’s 2.5x bandwidth advantage is substantial and likely feeds its integer and compression workloads. Both support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity differs, with AMD offering Gen 4 across 16 lanes and Intel offering Gen 5 across 20 lanes.

Integrated graphics also separate the pair. AMD ships a Radeon 8060S, while Intel includes Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. The transistor count for Intel is listed at 17,800 million across a 243 mm² die, while AMD does not list a transistor count but shows a dual-die design at 2x 70.6 mm².

The release timeline matters. Intel launched on 2024-10-23 with a launch MSRP of $319. AMD followed later, with a release date of 2026-01-05 and no listed MSRP. Intel’s multiplier is unlocked, while AMD’s is not. Intel’s market segment is desktop; AMD’s is mobile.

The Verdict

The data points to two distinct usage profiles. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is the choice for parallel integer workloads, data compression, and any task that can exploit 24 threads. Its 54.7% lead in integer math and 20.9% edge in compression are the strongest arguments in its favor. The 64 MB L3 cache and 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth provide a structural advantage for data-heavy processing. Its 96th percentile ranking among all CPUs, versus Intel’s 91st, indicates that AMD’s overall performance profile sits higher in the database distribution.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K is the pick for single-thread responsiveness, floating-point math, and encryption. Its 16.7% single-thread lead, 23.8% floating-point advantage, and 16.5% encryption edge are consistent across scalar workloads. The higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz and larger per-core caches support this pattern. Intel’s 14 cores without hyperthreading trade parallel throughput for simpler scheduling and per-core efficiency.

The nearest rivals in the database add context. AMD’s closest competitor is the Intel Xeon 654 at 0.2% behind, then the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX at 0.7% behind. Intel’s nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D at 1.3% behind, with the Intel Core i7-14700F at 0.8% behind. These deltas are small, suggesting both chips sit near peers in their respective performance classes.

For a mobile platform with a 55 watt TDP and integrated Radeon 8060S graphics, the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 delivers exceptional thread scaling. For a desktop system with a 125 watt TDP, unlocked multiplier, and Gen 5 PCIe, the Core Ultra 5 245K offers stronger single-core and floating-point capability. The choice hinges on whether the workload is parallel integer processing or scalar floating-point execution.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K has 14 cores and 14 threads. AMD has more threads, Intel has more physical cores.

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

A: The largest gap is in integer math, where AMD scores 152,414 versus Intel’s 98,524, a 54.7% advantage for AMD. The largest Intel win is floating-point math at 130,678 versus 99,548, a 23.8% margin.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: AMD uses quad-channel LPDDR5X with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. Intel uses dual-channel DDR5 with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. AMD’s bandwidth is 2.5 times higher.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: AMD lists a 55 watt TDP, while Intel lists a 125 watt TDP. Intel consumes over twice the power budget.

Q: Which chip supports PCIe Gen 5?

A: Intel supports Gen 5 across 20 lanes. AMD supports Gen 4 across 16 lanes.

Q: How do their percentile rankings compare?

A: AMD ranks in the 96th percentile among all CPUs. Intel ranks in the 91st percentile.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 excels in integer math, extended instructions, and data compression. The 54.7% integer math lead and 21.4% extended instructions margin point to workloads like cryptography, compression algorithms, and integer-heavy simulation code. The 20.9% compression advantage and 8% random string sorting win indicate strong data manipulation capabilities. The 5.1% multithread lead suggests general parallel productivity tasks favor AMD, but only slightly. The 64 MB L3 cache and 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth are the enabling factors.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K dominates floating-point math, prime number finding, and single-thread performance. The 23.8% floating-point margin and 22.7% prime number lead indicate scientific computing and number theory workloads favor Intel. The 16.7% single-thread edge and 16.5% encryption win point to interactive applications, legacy software with limited threading, and encryption tasks that benefit from higher clock speeds. The 6.3% physics win adds game physics simulation to Intel’s column. The 5.20 GHz boost clock and larger per-core L1 and L2 caches drive these results.

The average benchmark score of 90,541 for AMD versus 54,053 for Intel shows AMD ahead in the database’s aggregate metric, but this masks the workload-specific reality. AMD wins 5 tests, Intel wins 6. The choice is not about which chip is faster overall, but which chip matches the dominant workload type. Parallel integer workflows point to AMD. Scalar and floating-point workflows point to Intel.