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

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results between the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 and the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF show a clear split: the AMD part dominates integer-heavy workloads, while the Intel part takes the lead in floating-point, single-thread, and encryption tasks. The overall win count is nearly even, with Intel ahead by a single benchmark, 6 wins to 5, but the margins tell a more nuanced story.

The single largest victory belongs to AMD in passmark_integer_math. The Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 152,414 against 98,854 for the Core Ultra 5 245KF, a delta of 54.2%. That is a commanding lead, more than half again as much throughput in raw integer operations. This result aligns with the AMD processor's 12-core, 24-thread configuration, which provides simultaneous multithreading that the Intel chip lacks.

AMD also wins decisively in passmark_data_compression, scoring 554,760 versus 460,123, a 20.6% advantage. The gap is almost identical in passmark_extended_instructions, where AMD posts 45,666 against Intel's 37,912, a 20.5% lead. These two results reinforce the pattern that AMD's architecture extracts more work from instruction streams that are not purely scalar floating-point.

The remaining AMD wins are narrower. In passmark_multithread, the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 45,231, only 4.9% ahead of the Core Ultra 5 245KF's 43,110. In passmark_random_string_sorting, the AMD part scores 59,487 versus 55,206, a 7.8% lead. Both results indicate that the Intel chip's higher core count, 14 versus 12, helps it stay competitive in parallel workloads even without SMT, but AMD's thread count still gives it the edge.

Intel's largest win is in passmark_floating_point_math. The Core Ultra 5 245KF scores 131,546 against 99,548, a 24.3% advantage. This is a substantial reversal of the integer result, and it suggests that the Intel design has a significantly stronger floating-point execution pipeline. The same pattern appears in passmark_find_prime_numbers, where Intel scores 416 versus AMD's 320, a 23.1% lead, a workload that is sensitive to integer division and prime sieving, though the raw number gap is small.

In passmark_data_encryption, Intel scores 33,381 against 27,784, a 16.8% lead. This workload often benefits from dedicated AES-NI execution and high single-thread throughput. The single-thread results confirm this: Intel scores 4,715 in both passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread, while AMD scores 3,927, a 16.7% deficit. The Intel part also wins passmark_physics, 2,998 versus 2,887, a 3.7% margin, the closest result in the entire set.

Averaging across all recorded benchmarks, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 holds a significant overall advantage. Its average benchmark score is 90,541, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF averages 55,093. This places AMD in the 96th percentile of all CPUs in the database, compared to Intel's 91st percentile. The near rivals for AMD include the Intel Xeon 654 at 90,717, a 0.2% difference, and the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX at 91,199, a 0.7% difference. The Intel part sits closest to the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D at 54,762, a 0.6% gap, and the Intel Core 7 253PQE at 55,919, a 1.5% gap.

Where Each One Wins

For workloads that rely on integer arithmetic, data compression, string sorting, and broad multithreaded throughput, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is clearly the stronger processor. Its 24 threads provide a scheduling advantage in heavily parallel applications, and the 54.2% integer math lead is the standout metric. Extended instruction workloads, which often include SIMD integer operations, also favor AMD by 20.5%. Data compression, a common server and productivity task, favors AMD by 20.6%. Random string sorting, another integer-heavy operation, favors AMD by 7.8%. The multithread score, while closer, still favors AMD by 4.9%.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF is the better choice for floating-point math, single-thread responsiveness, and encryption. The 24.3% lead in floating-point math is the largest win for either side, and it indicates that the Intel architecture has a stronger FP unit or better FP scheduling. Prime number finding, which involves modular arithmetic and division, favors Intel by 23.1%. Encryption favors Intel by 16.8%, and the single-thread score favors Intel by 16.7%. Physics simulation, which often relies on floating-point integrators, favors Intel by 3.7%.

The use-case split is therefore clean. A workstation or server node processing large integer datasets, compressing logs, or running database-style string operations will see better throughput from the AMD part. A desktop system focused on scientific computing, financial modeling with heavy FP, or single-threaded legacy applications will respond faster on the Intel part. The Intel chip also has an unlocked multiplier, allowing user-controlled overclocking, while the AMD part is locked.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design schools. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, with a die size listed as 2x 70.6 mm². It is a mobile segment part on AMD Socket FP11, codenamed Strix Halo. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF uses the Arrow Lake architecture on a 3 nm TSMC process, with a 243 mm² die and 17,800 million transistors. It is a desktop segment part on Intel Socket 1851, codenamed Arrow Lake-S.

Core and thread counts differ significantly. AMD provides 12 cores and 24 threads, while Intel provides 14 cores and 14 threads. Intel has more physical cores but no simultaneous multithreading, so its thread count equals its core count. AMD has fewer cores but doubles the thread count. This explains why AMD wins multithreaded integer workloads despite having fewer physical cores.

Cache hierarchies also diverge. The AMD part has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3. The Intel part has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and only 24 MB of shared L3. The Intel chip has more private cache per core, which helps single-thread performance, but AMD has nearly three times the shared L3, which helps data-sharing across threads.

Memory support is another major split. AMD uses LPDDR5X with a quad-channel bus and 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Intel uses DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. AMD has exactly double the memory bandwidth, a critical factor for integrated graphics and memory-bandwidth-bound workloads. AMD also supports ECC memory, while Intel does not. The AMD part includes integrated Radeon 8060S graphics, while the Intel part has no integrated graphics (N/A). PCIe connectivity favors Intel, which provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only), versus AMD's Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only).

Clock speeds favor Intel. The Core Ultra 5 245KF has a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. Intel's higher clocks, especially the 200 MHz boost advantage, contribute to its single-thread wins. Power envelopes differ widely: AMD is rated at 55 W TDP, while Intel is rated at 125 W TDP. The AMD part is far more power-efficient per the recorded specifications, though it targets a mobile form factor.

Release timing is also distinct. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF was released on 2024-10-23, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 was released on 2026-01-05. The AMD part is newer by more than a year. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $294, stated once here for reference.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF has 14 cores, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 12 cores. However, AMD has 24 threads versus Intel's 14, because AMD supports simultaneous multithreading and Intel does not.

Q: Why does AMD win integer math by such a large margin?

A: In passmark_integer_math, AMD scores 152,414 versus Intel's 98,854, a 54.2% lead. The primary factor is AMD's 24 threads, which allow better parallel utilization in integer-heavy workloads, combined with a larger 64 MB shared L3 cache.

Q: Why does Intel win floating-point math?

A: In passmark_floating_point_math, Intel scores 131,546 versus AMD's 99,548, a 24.3% advantage. Intel's higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz and its per-core L2 cache of 3 MB likely contribute to stronger FP throughput, though the exact microarchitectural reasons are not recorded in the database.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 supports LPDDR5X on a quad-channel bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF supports DDR5 on a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s. AMD's bandwidth is exactly double Intel's.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF does not support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 includes a Radeon 8060S integrated GPU. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A.

Specification Differences

• Cores: AMD 12, Intel 14
• Threads: AMD 24, Intel 14
• Base Clock: AMD 3.20 GHz, Intel 4.20 GHz
• Boost Clock: AMD 5.00 GHz, Intel 5.20 GHz
• TDP: AMD 55 W, Intel 125 W
• Socket: AMD Socket FP11, Intel Socket 1851
• Architecture: Zen 5, Arrow Lake
• Process Node: AMD 4 nm, Intel 3 nm
• Transistors: AMD not listed, Intel 17,800 million
• Die Size: AMD 2x 70.6 mm², Intel 243 mm²
• L1 Cache: AMD 80 KB per core, Intel 192 KB per core
• L2 Cache: AMD 1 MB per core, Intel 3 MB per core
• L3 Cache: AMD 64 MB shared, Intel 24 MB shared
• Memory Support: LPDDR5X, DDR5
• Memory Bus: Quad-channel, Dual-channel
• Memory Bandwidth: AMD 256.0 GB/s, Intel 102.4 GB/s
• ECC Memory: AMD true, Intel false
• PCIe: AMD Gen 4, 16 lanes (CPU only), Intel Gen 5, 20 lanes (CPU only)
• Integrated Graphics: Radeon 8060S, N/A
• Market Segment: Mobile, Desktop
• Release Date: 2026-01-05, 2024-10-23
• Multiplier Unlocked: AMD false, Intel true
• Part Number: 100-000001979, SRQCY
• Average Benchmark Score: AMD 90,541, Intel 55,093
• Percentile vs All CPUs: AMD 96, Intel 91