AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 vs Intel Core 5 330 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive overall victory for the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385, which wins 15 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The AMD part dominates across nearly every processing workload, often by margins exceeding 100%. The Intel Core 5 330 manages to win only two tests, both of which are the same PassMark single-thread measurement.

The largest performance gap appears in PassMark integer math, where the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 scores 105056 against 33258 for the Intel Core 5 330, a 215.9% advantage. This indicates a massive difference in raw integer throughput, which typically translates to faster general-purpose computing, spreadsheet operations, and database workloads. Similarly, data compression favors the AMD chip heavily: 379448 versus 145287, a 161.2% edge. Extended instruction sets also show a 145.5% lead for AMD (31442 vs 12808), suggesting superior SIMD and cryptographic instruction handling.

The Cinebench suite reinforces the same pattern. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD processor scores 28424, while the Intel processor manages 13150, a 116.2% difference. The single-core Cinebench R23 result shows a comparable gap: 4012 for AMD versus 1856 for Intel, also 116.2%. These near-identical deltas across both single and multi-core tests indicate that the AMD part enjoys a consistent architectural advantage in rendering workloads, not merely a core-count benefit.

Cinebench R15 and R20 tell the same story. R15 multi-core: 2865 vs 1325 (116.2%). R15 single-core: 404 vs 186 (117.2%). R20 multi-core: 11938 vs 5523 (116.2%). R20 single-core: 1685 vs 779 (116.3%). The consistency of these percentages across all six Cinebench tests strongly suggests a stable clock-for-clock performance advantage rather than workload-specific behavior.

PassMark multi-thread performance also heavily favors AMD: 32075 vs 15471, a 107.3% lead. Floating-point math favors AMD by 58.6% (69580 vs 43885). Random string sorting shows a 129.5% advantage for AMD (40784 vs 17771). Data encryption favors AMD by 71.3% (18978 vs 11076). Physics simulation favors AMD by 42.5% (1711 vs 1201). Even prime number finding, a test that often rewards high single-thread frequency, shows AMD ahead by 37.7% (157 vs 114).

The only place the Intel Core 5 330 wins is PassMark single-thread and singlethread (the same test recorded twice), where it scores 4088 versus AMD's 3995, a 2.3% margin. This is a narrow but genuine win, indicating that the Intel part can edge ahead in lightly threaded, latency-sensitive scenarios that depend on burst performance.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 wins in every multi-threaded category and nearly every single-threaded category. Its advantages are largest in integer math, compression, extended instructions, and random string sorting, all of which benefit from a combination of high core count, high thread count, and efficient instruction execution. The data shows that the AMD part is the clear choice for rendering, video encoding, scientific simulation, data compression, and any workload that can use more than six threads.

The Intel Core 5 330 wins only in PassMark single-thread performance, with a 2.3% edge over AMD. This makes it marginally better for tasks that are strictly serial and cannot use multiple cores, such as certain legacy applications or simple scripting that runs on a single thread. However, the margin is small enough that real-world differences would be difficult to notice. In every other measured workload, including all Cinebench tests, the AMD part is significantly ahead.

For users who prioritize raw multi-core throughput, the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 delivers more than double the performance in most Cinebench and PassMark multi-thread tests. For users who need the absolute highest single-thread score in PassMark, the Intel Core 5 330 holds a slight advantage, but that advantage does not extend to Cinebench single-core, where AMD leads by more than 100%.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different manufacturers and use fundamentally different designs. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, codenamed Strix Halo. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. Its cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD chip supports LPDDR5X memory over a quad-channel bus, providing 256.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth, and it supports ECC memory. It uses the AMD Socket FP11 and includes Radeon 8050S integrated graphics.

The Intel Core 5 330 uses the Wildcat Lake architecture on a 3 nm Intel process. It has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no hyperthreading. Its base clock is 1.50 GHz and its boost clock is 4.60 GHz. The cache layout is different: 192 KB of L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The Intel chip supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, but only over a single-channel bus, yielding 59.7 GB/s of memory bandwidth. It does not support ECC memory, uses the Intel BGA 1516 socket, and integrates Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores.

The memory bandwidth difference is enormous: 256.0 GB/s versus 59.7 GB/s. This directly explains why the AMD part performs so well in memory-intensive workloads like data compression and integer math. The AMD chip also supports ECC memory, which the Intel chip does not, a meaningful feature for data integrity in professional or server-adjacent use cases. The AMD part has more cores and threads, more L3 cache, and a higher boost clock. The Intel part has a smaller process node (3 nm vs 4 nm), which typically improves power efficiency, but its much lower base clock and lack of multithreading limit its throughput.

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 compare to the Intel Core 5 330 in multi-core rendering?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD scores 28424 while the Intel scores 13150, giving AMD a 116.2% advantage. Similar deltas appear in Cinebench R15 and R20 multi-core tests.

Q: Which processor has higher single-thread performance?

A: The Intel Core 5 330 wins PassMark single-thread with 4088 versus 3995 for AMD, a 2.3% margin. However, in Cinebench R23 single-core, AMD leads with 4012 versus 1856, a 116.2% gap.

Q: What memory configurations do these processors support?

A: The AMD chip supports LPDDR5X over a quad-channel bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth and ECC memory. The Intel chip supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC.

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What is the release date and production status of each?

A: The AMD part was released on 2025-01-05 and is active in production. The Intel part was released on 2026-04-15 and is also active in production.

Q: How do the integrated graphics compare?

A: The AMD chip includes Radeon 8050S integrated graphics. The Intel chip includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The database does not provide graphics benchmark scores for either.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 | Intel Core 5 330 |

| --- | --- | --- |

| Cores | 8 | 6 |

| Threads | 16 | 6 |

| Base Clock | 3.60 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 4.60 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP11 | Intel BGA 1516 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Wildcat Lake |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB per core | 192 KB |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB per core | 2.5 MB |

| L3 Cache | 32 MB shared | 6 MB shared |

| Memory Support | LPDDR5X | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus | Quad-channel | Single-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 59.7 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 Lanes | Gen 4, 6 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 8050S | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) |

| Release Date | 2025-01-05 | 2026-04-15 |

| Launch MSRP | None listed | $309 |

The AMD part has a higher TDP of 55 W versus 15 W for Intel, consistent with its larger core count and higher clock speeds. The AMD chip also offers more PCIe lanes (16 vs 6). The Intel chip uses a smaller process node but compensates with a much lower base clock.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to a single conclusion: the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is the stronger processor in nearly every measurable way. It wins 15 of 17 head-to-head tests, with margins exceeding 100% in most Cinebench and PassMark multi-thread workloads. Its 8-core, 16-thread configuration, 32 MB of L3 cache, and 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth give it a decisive advantage in rendering, compression, encryption, and integer math. The Intel Core 5 330 cannot match these results despite its smaller 3 nm process node.

The only scenario where the Intel Core 5 330 leads is PassMark single-thread performance, where it scores 4088 versus 3995 for AMD. That 2.3% edge is real but narrow. Users who require the absolute highest single-thread PassMark score might prefer the Intel part, but that advantage does not appear in Cinebench single-core tests, where AMD leads by 116.2%. The Intel part also has a much lower TDP of 15 W, which may be relevant for fanless or ultra-portable designs, but the database does not include power efficiency benchmarks.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is the recommended choice for any workload that benefits from multiple cores, high memory bandwidth, or ECC support. The Intel Core 5 330 is only preferable in the specific case of maximizing PassMark single-thread score, and even then the margin is small. The data shows a clear and consistent performance hierarchy, with AMD ahead in all but one narrow category.