AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 vs Intel Core 5 330 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data records a decisive sweep for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395, winning all 15 head-to-head comparisons against the Intel Core 5 330. The scale of the victory varies dramatically by workload, revealing where the architectural gap between the two parts is narrow or vast.

The closest contest is in single-threaded performance. In PassMark's single-thread test, the AMD scores 4147 against Intel's 4088, a margin of just 1.4%. Cinebench R23 single-core shows a similar pattern but with a slightly larger gap: AMD's 2044 beats Intel's 1856 by 10.1%. These results indicate that while both processors have competitive single-core capability, the AMD part still holds the edge in lightly threaded work.

Multi-threaded performance tells a completely different story. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 delivers 35314 in Cinebench R23 multicore, which is 168.5% ahead of the Intel Core 5 330's 13150. Even more dramatic is Cinebench R15 multicore, where AMD's 5463 versus Intel's 1325 represents a 312.3% advantage. These are not incremental gains; they are category-level differences in throughput.

The integer math workload produces the largest single delta in the entire comparison. AMD scores 200665 in PassMark integer math, versus Intel's 33258, a 503.4% advantage. This workload heavily favors the AMD's 16 cores and 32 threads over Intel's 6 cores and 6 threads. Data compression shows a similar pattern, with AMD at 690650 versus Intel's 145287, a 375.4% gap. Extended instructions follow at 339.9%, with AMD at 56346 and Intel at 12808.

Other workloads show substantial but less extreme advantages. Random string sorting sees AMD at 76177 versus Intel's 17771, a 328.7% lead. PassMark multithread shows AMD at 54934 against Intel's 15471, a 255.1% difference. Data encryption records AMD at 35455 versus 11076, a 220.1% gap. Floating-point math has AMD at 128682 against Intel's 43885, a 193.2% lead. Physics testing shows AMD at 3481 versus Intel's 1201, a 189.8% difference. Prime number finding completes the sweep with AMD at 303 versus Intel's 114, a 165.8% advantage.

The average benchmark score places AMD at 77740, compared to Intel's 18345. AMD sits in the 95th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while Intel sits in the 72nd percentile. When positioned against its nearest rivals, AMD's average score is 1.6% above the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX and 1.6% above the AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P, while trailing the Intel Core i9-14900K by 1.7%. Intel's average score is nearly identical to its nearest rivals: 0.1% above the Intel Core i3-14100 and 0.2% above the Intel Core 3 305, while 0.2% below both the Intel Core 7 360 and Intel Core i3-13100.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 wins every recorded benchmark category, but the degree of dominance maps clearly to workload type. The largest advantages appear in heavily parallel workloads: integer math at 503.4%, data compression at 375.4%, and extended instructions at 339.9%. These tasks scale with core count and thread count, and the AMD part simply has far more resources to throw at them.

The smallest advantages appear in single-threaded tasks. PassMark single-thread shows just a 1.4% gap, and Cinebench R23 single-core shows 10.1%. This suggests that for applications that rely primarily on one or two threads, the two processors are much closer in capability. The Intel Core 5 330's 4.60 GHz boost clock partially compensates for its lower core count in these scenarios.

For mixed workloads, the AMD part still holds command. Cinebench R23 multicore at 168.5% ahead and PassMark multithread at 255.1% ahead indicate that any application that can use more than a few threads will see a major performance uplift on the AMD side. The PassMark physics test, which often reflects simulated physics in games and engineering tools, shows AMD at 189.8% ahead, suggesting that the AMD part has a substantial advantage in that specific type of computation.

The Intel Core 5 330's closest performance relative to AMD comes in single-threaded PassMark, where it trails by only 1.4%. This is the only benchmark where Intel comes within single-digit percentage points of the AMD part. In every other test, the gap exceeds 10%, and in most cases it exceeds 100%. The data implies that the Intel part is a capable processor for lightly threaded or short-burst workloads, but its 6-core, 6-thread configuration limits it severely in sustained parallel work.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 uses the Zen 5 architecture under the Strix Halo codename, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core 5 330 uses the Wildcat Lake codename on Intel's 3 nm process. Both target the mobile market segment, but their execution approaches diverge sharply.

Core and thread counts represent the most significant architectural split. AMD provides 16 cores and 32 threads, enabling simultaneous multithreading on every core. Intel provides 6 cores and 6 threads, with no hyperthreading available. This explains the massive multi-threaded benchmark gaps. The AMD part also has a higher base clock at 3.00 GHz against Intel's 1.50 GHz, and a higher boost clock at 5.10 GHz against Intel's 4.60 GHz.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. AMD allocates 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3 cache. Intel uses 192 KB of L1 total, 2.5 MB of L2 total, and 6 MB of shared L3. The AMD part's 64 MB L3 cache is more than ten times larger than Intel's 6 MB, which benefits workloads with large working sets that can fit in the shared cache.

Memory architecture also diverges. AMD supports LPDDR5X memory over a quad-channel bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth, and includes ECC memory support. Intel supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, but over a single-channel bus, delivering 59.7 GB/s, with no ECC support. The AMD part provides over four times the memory bandwidth, which directly feeds its large core count and cache design.

The integrated graphics differ as well. AMD uses the Radeon 8060S, while Intel uses Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The PCIe configuration also differs: AMD provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while Intel provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes from the CPU. Both processors have locked multipliers and are listed as active production parts. AMD's release date is recorded as 2025-01-05, while Intel's is 2026-04-15.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets for the two parts show several direct differences. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 uses AMD Socket FP11, while the Intel Core 5 330 uses Intel BGA 1516. Power draw differs significantly: AMD is rated at 55 W TDP, Intel at 15 W TDP. The process nodes differ: AMD at 4 nm from TSMC, Intel at 3 nm from Intel. The die size is recorded only for AMD at 2x 70.6 mm²; no die size is listed for Intel.

Memory support differs in type and channel count. AMD supports only LPDDR5X, while Intel supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. AMD's memory bus is quad-channel with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth; Intel's is single-channel with 59.7 GB/s. ECC memory is supported on AMD but not on Intel. Integrated graphics differ: AMD uses Radeon 8060S, Intel uses Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe). PCIe configurations differ: AMD has Gen 4 with 16 lanes from the CPU, Intel has Gen 4 with 6 lanes from the CPU. The part numbers differ: AMD is 100-000001099, Intel is SAE3G. The launch MSRP for Intel is $309; no launch MSRP is recorded for AMD.

The cache configuration differs in structure. AMD lists L1 as 80 KB per core, L2 as 1 MB per core, and L3 as 64 MB shared. Intel lists L1 as 192 KB, L2 as 2.5 MB, and L3 as 6 MB shared. Both processors are listed as mobile market segment parts with active production status.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 has 16 cores and 32 threads. The Intel Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: How large is the single-threaded performance gap?

A: In PassMark single-thread, AMD scores 4147 versus Intel's 4088, a 1.4% advantage. In Cinebench R23 single-core, AMD scores 2044 versus Intel's 1856, a 10.1% advantage.

Q: What is the largest benchmark advantage for AMD?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark integer math, where AMD scores 200665 versus Intel's 33258, a 503.4% advantage.

Q: Does the Intel part support ECC memory?

A: No. ECC memory is supported on the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 but not on the Intel Core 5 330.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: AMD provides 256.0 GB/s over a quad-channel LPDDR5X bus. Intel provides 59.7 GB/s over a single-channel bus supporting DDR5 and LPDDR5X.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare to nearby rivals?

A: AMD's average score of 77740 is 1.6% above the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX and 1.7% below the Intel Core i9-14900K. Intel's average score of 18345 is 0.1% above the Intel Core i3-14100 and 0.2% below the Intel Core 7 360.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear division of roles. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is the dominant performer across every recorded benchmark, with particularly large leads in multi-threaded, memory-intensive, and integer-heavy workloads. Its 16 cores, 32 threads, 64 MB L3 cache, and 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth place it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs in the database. For workloads that can use many threads, a large cache, or high memory bandwidth, the AMD part is the choice.

The Intel Core 5 330 occupies a different position. Its 6 cores and 6 threads, combined with a 15 W TDP, make it a much lower-power part. Its single-threaded PassMark score of 4088 is within 1.4% of AMD's 4147, so for lightly threaded tasks the performance gap nearly disappears. Its average score of 18345 places it in the 72nd percentile, directly competitive with parts like the Intel Core i3-14100 and Intel Core 7 360, which sit within 0.2% of its score.

The choice between the two depends entirely on workload demands. Applications that scale across cores, require substantial cache capacity, or depend on high memory bandwidth will favor the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 by margins ranging from 165.8% to 503.4%. Applications that are single-threaded or operate under strict power constraints may find the Intel Core 5 330 sufficient, given its much lower 15 W TDP and competitive single-thread results. The recorded data does not show any benchmark category where the Intel part wins, but its power profile and compact 6-lane PCIe configuration indicate a design aimed at efficiency and simplicity rather than peak throughput.