AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus Comparison

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 and Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus occupy different corners of the performance spectrum, and the benchmark data reflects that split clearly. The AMD part, a 12-core Zen 5 mobile processor with 24 threads, wins two of the eleven head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel desktop chip, an 18-core Arrow Lake Refresh part with 18 threads, takes the other nine. The AMD processor holds a 96th percentile ranking among all CPUs, while the Intel chip sits at the 93rd percentile. The average benchmark score for the AMD part is 90541, compared to 66855 for the Intel, though that aggregate figure masks the specific workloads where each processor excels.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 demonstrates its strengths in integer-heavy and extended instruction workloads. It delivers a 21.8% advantage over the Intel part in PassMark integer math, scoring 152414 against 125091. The AMD chip also wins in extended instructions, where it posts 45666 versus 44565, a 2.5% margin. These results indicate the Zen 5 architecture handles complex arithmetic and modern instruction set extensions with particular efficiency. For workloads that rely on these operations, such as database queries, financial modeling, and scientific computing, the AMD processor is the stronger choice.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus dominates nearly every other measured category. Its largest win comes in floating-point math, where it scores 162692 against the AMD chip's 99548, a 38.8% advantage. The Intel part also leads in prime number finding by 34.2%, scoring 486 versus 320, and in data encryption by 34.1%, scoring 42144 versus 27784. The multi-threaded PassMark score favors Intel at 51596 against 45231, a 12.3% lead. Single-thread performance also goes to Intel, with a score of 4757 versus 3927, a 17.4% margin. The Intel processor additionally wins in physics simulation, random string sorting, and data compression, making it the better option for general productivity, content creation, and tasks that scale with raw thread throughput.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-thread score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 4757 in the PassMark single-thread test, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 3927. Intel leads by 17.4% in this metric.

Q: How do the two chips compare in multi-threaded performance?

A: In the PassMark multi-thread test, the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 51596, which is 12.3% higher than the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392's score of 45231.

Q: In which benchmark does the AMD processor show its largest advantage?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 leads by 21.8% in integer math, scoring 152414 compared to the Intel chip's 125091.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap in the head-to-head results?

A: The largest delta is in floating-point math, where the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus outscores the AMD part by 38.8%, with scores of 162692 and 99548 respectively.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus list ECC memory support in their specifications.

Q: What are the release dates for these two processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 was released on 2026-01-05, and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus followed on 2026-03-10.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive result in the comparison is floating-point math. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 162692, which is 38.8% higher than the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392's 99548. This is the single largest delta in the entire benchmark set, suggesting the Intel chip's architecture is substantially better suited to scientific and engineering calculations that rely on floating-point operations. The 38.8% margin is a clear statement of intent from the desktop part.

The Intel processor also shows a strong edge in data encryption, scoring 42144 against the AMD chip's 27784, a 34.1% difference. This result pairs with the prime number finding test, where Intel leads by 34.2% with a score of 486 versus 320. Both of these workloads benefit from the Intel part's higher clock speeds and larger per-core cache allocation. The single-thread test reinforces this pattern, with Intel scoring 4757 against 3927, a 17.4% lead that carries into physics simulation, where Intel again leads by 17.4% with 3494 versus 2887.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 fights back in integer math. Its score of 152414 beats the Intel chip's 125091 by 21.8%, the only sub-benchmark where the AMD part exceeds a 5% advantage. The extended instructions test also goes to AMD, though by a narrower 2.5% margin, with scores of 45666 and 44565. These wins show that the Zen 5 cores can out-execute the Intel architecture when the workload involves integer arithmetic, but they do not compensate for the Intel part's advantages elsewhere.

The multi-thread test gives Intel a 12.3% win, with a score of 51596 versus 45231. Random string sorting follows with Intel ahead by 13.9%, scoring 69090 against 59487. Data compression is the closest contest, with Intel winning by just 2.5% at 568721 versus 554760. The compression result is notable because it is the only benchmark where the two processors finish within a small margin, indicating that both architectures handle this workload with similar efficiency.

Specification Differences

The core and thread configurations differ significantly. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus uses 18 cores and 18 threads. The Intel part has more physical cores, but the AMD part has more threads due to simultaneous multithreading. Clock speeds also differ, with the AMD chip running a 3.20 GHz base clock and a 5.00 GHz boost clock, while the Intel chip runs a 4.20 GHz base clock and a 5.30 GHz boost clock. The Intel part's higher clocks contribute to its single-thread and floating-point wins.

Thermal and power specifications separate the two as well. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has a TDP of 55, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has a TDP of 125. The socket types are different: AMD uses Socket FP11, and Intel uses Socket 1851. The AMD part is a mobile processor, while the Intel part is a desktop processor. The AMD chip does not have an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel chip has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking.

Memory support diverges sharply. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 supports LPDDR5X memory over a quad-channel bus with 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus with 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD part's memory bandwidth is more than double that of the Intel part, a factor that can influence memory-intensive workloads. PCIe connectivity also differs, with the AMD chip offering Gen 4 with 16 lanes and the Intel chip offering Gen 5 with 20 lanes.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses a Radeon 8060S GPU, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $199, while no launch MSRP is recorded for the AMD part.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is built on the Zen 5 architecture with the Strix Halo codename. It uses a 4 nm process node from TSMC and has a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². The cache layout includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part belongs to the Ryzen AI Max generation and is manufactured by AMD.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus uses the Arrow Lake Refresh codename and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 generation. It is built on a 3 nm process node from TSMC and has a die size of 243 mm². The transistor count is 17,800 million. The cache hierarchy is different: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part's L3 cache is smaller than the AMD part's 64 MB, but its per-core L1 and L2 allocations are larger.

The process node difference, 4 nm for AMD versus 3 nm for Intel, is a notable architectural distinction. The Intel chip's smaller process node and higher transistor count of 17,800 million suggest a denser design, though the AMD part's dual-die layout of 2x 70.6 mm² reflects a different approach to scaling. The AMD architecture uses a chiplet-style configuration, while the Intel part uses a monolithic die, which is one reason for the differences in power consumption and thermal characteristics. The AMD chip's lower TDP of 55 indicates a design optimized for mobile efficiency.