AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 vs Intel Core 5 221E Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data splits these two processors into distinct roles. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 wins 10 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, while the Intel Core 5 221E wins 7. The AMD part leads in every Cinebench test, all by a consistent 9.6% to 9.8% margin, and it holds a commanding 72.6% lead in PassMark extended instructions. The Intel part counters with wins in integer math, floating point math, physics, prime number finding, and single-thread PassMark tests. The AMD processor is the pick for rendering, compression, and instruction-heavy workloads. The Intel processor is the pick for math throughput and physics simulation. The AMD chip also carries the higher average benchmark score at 43326 versus 40144, and it sits at the 88th percentile of all CPUs compared to the Intel part's 87th percentile.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process. It packs 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core 5 221E uses the Bartlett Lake codename on a 10 nm Intel process, and it packs 14 cores and 20 threads. The core counts differ sharply, but the AMD part compensates with a higher base clock of 3.60 GHz versus 2.70 GHz. Boost clocks are close, with AMD at 5.00 GHz and Intel at 5.20 GHz. The AMD chip runs on AMD Socket FP11, while the Intel chip uses Intel Socket 1700. The AMD processor targets the mobile segment, while the Intel processor targets the desktop segment.

Cache configurations differ as well. Both parts use 80 KB of L1 per core. AMD uses 1 MB of L2 per core, while Intel uses 2 MB per core. AMD has 32 MB of shared L3, while Intel has 24 MB of shared L3. The AMD chip's L3 advantage is offset by Intel's larger per-core L2. Memory support also diverges. AMD uses LPDDR5X memory on a quad-channel bus with 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Intel uses DDR4 and DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. Both support ECC memory. PCIe generation differs: AMD provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes, while Intel provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes. Integrated graphics differ as well, with AMD using the Radeon 8050S and Intel using UHD Graphics 730. The Intel die measures 257 mm², and the part number is SRQDVQ659. The AMD part number is 100-000001422.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite shows a clean sweep for AMD. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, AMD scores 2865 against Intel's 2613, a 9.6% lead. In R15 single-core, AMD scores 404 against 368, a 9.8% lead. R20 multi-core shows 11938 versus 10891, again 9.6%. R20 single-core shows 1685 versus 1537, again 9.6%. R23 multi-core shows 28424 versus 25933, a 9.6% gap. R23 single-core shows 4012 versus 3661, once more 9.6%. This consistent margin across every Cinebench version indicates a stable architectural advantage in both single-threaded and multi-threaded rendering tasks.

PassMark results tell a more split story. AMD wins data compression with 379448 against 324285, a 17% margin. AMD also wins random string sorting with 40784 versus 37686, an 8.2% margin. AMD wins multithread with 32075 versus 30510, a 5.1% margin. The largest AMD win is in extended instructions: 31442 versus 18216, a 72.6% lead. This suggests the Zen 5 core handles AVX-style workloads far more efficiently than the Intel part.

Intel takes the math-oriented tests. Integer math goes to Intel at 117813 versus 105056, a 10.8% lead. Floating point math goes to Intel at 79028 versus 69580, a 12% lead. Physics goes to Intel at 2230 versus 1711, a 23.3% lead. Prime number finding goes to Intel at 173 versus 157, a 9.2% lead. Data encryption goes to Intel at 19205 versus 18978, a narrow 1.2% lead. PassMark single-thread also goes to Intel at 4147 versus 3995, a 3.7% lead.

The average benchmark scores reflect the overall balance. AMD averages 43326, while Intel averages 40144. AMD's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465 at 43431 with a -0.2% delta, the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H at 43210 with a 0.3% delta, the AMD Ryzen 7 170 at 43689 with a -0.8% delta, and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 7745 at 43704 with a -0.9% delta. Intel's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 7700 at 40081 with a 0.2% delta, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 at 40048 with a 0.2% delta, the AMD Ryzen 9 270 at 40246 with a -0.3% delta, and the Intel Core i9-13905H at 40313 with a -0.4% delta. Both parts sit within a tight band of their closest competitors, with deltas under 1% in every case.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification field. AMD uses 8 cores and 16 threads; Intel uses 14 cores and 20 threads. AMD has a 3.60 GHz base clock and 5.00 GHz boost clock; Intel has a 2.70 GHz base clock and 5.20 GHz boost clock. AMD has a 55 W TDP; Intel has a 65 W TDP. AMD uses AMD Socket FP11; Intel uses Intel Socket 1700. AMD uses the Zen 5 architecture with the Strix Halo codename; Intel's architecture field is null, but the codename is Bartlett Lake. AMD is built on a 4 nm TSMC process; Intel is built on a 10 nm Intel process. AMD has no die size listed; Intel has a 257 mm² die size. AMD has 1 MB L2 per core; Intel has 2 MB L2 per core. AMD has 32 MB shared L3; Intel has 24 MB shared L3. AMD supports LPDDR5X on a quad-channel bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth; Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. AMD uses PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes; Intel uses PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes. AMD integrates Radeon 8050S graphics; Intel integrates UHD Graphics 730. AMD targets mobile; Intel targets desktop. AMD released on 2025-01-05; Intel released on 2025-01-12. AMD has no launch MSRP listed; Intel has a launch MSRP of $232. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. Both are active production parts.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 has an average benchmark score of 43326, while the Intel Core 5 221E has an average score of 40144.

Q: How large is AMD's lead in extended instructions?

A: AMD scores 31442 in PassMark extended instructions against Intel's 18216, a 72.6% advantage.

Q: Where does the Intel Core 5 221E beat the AMD part by the largest margin?

A: Intel wins PassMark physics by 23.3%, scoring 2230 against AMD's 1711. It also wins floating point math by 12% and integer math by 10.8%.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 and the Intel Core 5 221E support ECC memory.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each processor support?

A: AMD supports 256.0 GB/s over a quad-channel LPDDR5X bus. Intel supports 89.6 GB/s over a dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 bus.

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

A: Intel scores 4147 in PassMark single-thread, while AMD scores 3995, giving Intel a 3.7% lead in that specific test.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: AMD has 8 cores and 16 threads. Intel has 14 cores and 20 threads.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 wins all six Cinebench tests, covering both single-core and multi-core rendering workloads. It also wins PassMark multithread, data compression, random string sorting, and extended instructions. That profile points to rendering, video encoding, compression, and instruction-heavy scientific workloads as its natural territory. The 17% compression lead and the 72.6% extended instructions lead are the standout margins. The 32 MB shared L3 cache and the 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth support these workloads.

The Intel Core 5 221E wins PassMark integer math, floating point math, physics, prime number finding, data encryption, and single-thread. The 23.3% physics lead and the 12% floating point lead are its strongest results. The 14-core and 20-thread configuration, along with the 2 MB L2 per core, drives its math throughput. The higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz contributes to its single-thread PassMark win. Desktop users running physics simulations, encryption, or math-heavy code would see the Intel part pull ahead.

The overall win count favors AMD at 10 wins versus 7, and the average benchmark score favors AMD by 3182 points. The percentile ranking also favors AMD at 88 versus 87. The data does not show a single dominant processor across all tests. It shows two parts with opposing strengths, and the choice depends on whether the workload leans toward Cinebench-style rendering and compression or PassMark-style math and physics.