AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 vs Intel Core 5 211TE Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data presents a clear split between these two processors. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 wins every single one of the 15 recorded head-to-head tests, leaving the Intel Core 5 211TE with zero wins. This is not a close contest by any metric, but the margins vary considerably depending on the workload type.

For multi-threaded and heavily parallel workloads, the AMD part dominates by enormous margins. The Cinebench R15 multicore test shows the AMD scoring 3918 against Intel's 1229, a 218.8% advantage. PassMark's integer math test tells a similar story: 148508 versus 33991, a 336.9% lead. The data compression test shows the widest gap in raw percentage terms at 279.3%, with AMD at 506170 and Intel at 133434. These are workloads that scale with core count, thread count, and memory bandwidth, all areas where the AMD part holds substantial structural advantages.

Single-threaded performance tells a different narrative. While AMD still wins, the margin shrinks dramatically. In Cinebench R23 single-core, AMD scores 1976 against Intel's 1722, a modest 14.8% advantage. This suggests that the Intel Core 5 211TE's architecture is competitive in lightly threaded tasks, but its deficits in core count and memory subsystem scaling become overwhelming once parallelization ramps up.

The PassMark physics test, which often reflects gaming and real-time simulation workloads, shows AMD at 2773 versus Intel's 1278, a 117% lead. This is a smaller margin than the pure compute tests, but still a decisive victory. The data encryption test shows AMD at 26027 versus 7231, a 259.9% advantage, indicating superior cryptographic throughput for security-sensitive applications.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, while the Intel Core 5 211TE is built on the Bartlett Lake architecture using Intel's 10 nm process. This process node difference alone explains much of the efficiency and performance gap, as the AMD part packs more transistors into a smaller area with better power characteristics.

Core counts differ significantly: AMD provides 12 cores and 24 threads, while Intel offers 10 cores and 16 threads. The AMD part also runs at a higher base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, compared to Intel's 1.70 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost. The lower base clock on the Intel part is notable, suggesting it may throttle more aggressively under sustained loads or rely more heavily on boost behavior.

Cache hierarchies diverge sharply. Both share 80 KB of L1 per core, but AMD uses 1 MB L2 per core while Intel uses 1.25 MB per core. The critical difference comes at L3: AMD provides 64 MB shared, while Intel offers only 20 MB shared. This 3.2x L3 capacity advantage helps AMD in workloads with large working sets that benefit from caching.

Memory support differs in both type and bandwidth. The AMD part supports LPDDR5X with a quad-channel memory bus delivering 256.0 GB/s. The Intel part supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus at 76.8 GB/s. This 3.3x bandwidth advantage for AMD is substantial for memory-bound workloads like data compression and encryption, which show some of the largest performance gaps.

The integrated graphics also differ: AMD uses the Radeon 8050S while Intel uses UHD Graphics 730. Both support ECC memory. The AMD part is classified as a mobile processor on AMD Socket FP11, while the Intel part is a desktop processor on Intel Socket 1700. PCIe support also differs: AMD provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes, while Intel provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes. The AMD processor was released on 2025-01-05, one week before the Intel part on 2025-01-12.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single margin in the entire dataset comes from PassMark's extended instructions test, where AMD scores 40888 versus Intel's 8615, a 374.6% advantage. This test exercises SIMD and specialized instruction sets, and the Zen 5 architecture's wider execution resources show clearly here. The find prime numbers test shows a 348.6% gap, with AMD at 323 and Intel at 72, indicating superior integer throughput in algorithmic workloads.

Integer math shows a 336.9% delta, with AMD at 148508 and Intel at 33991. This is a fundamental computation test that benefits from both core count and per-core execution efficiency. Random string sorting shows a 272.3% gap, with AMD at 55248 and Intel at 14838, reflecting memory bandwidth advantages in data movement tasks.

The multithread benchmark shows AMD at 42912 versus Intel's 11685, a 267.2% delta. Floating point math shows a 262% gap, with AMD at 94666 and Intel at 26150. Data encryption shows a 259.9% delta, and data compression shows a 279.3% delta, both consistent with the memory bandwidth and core count advantages.

The Cinebench R15 multicore test shows a 218.8% delta, the largest Cinebench margin, while Cinebench R23 multicore shows a 103.5% delta with AMD at 24828 and Intel at 12201. Single-core results are far closer: Cinebench R15 single-core shows a 75.1% delta, Cinebench R23 single-core shows only a 14.8% delta, and PassMark single-thread shows a 181.7% delta with AMD at 3967 and Intel at 1408.

The physics test shows the smallest percentage gap among the parallel workloads at 117%, with AMD at 2773 and Intel at 1278. This test may have different scaling characteristics than pure compute tests, but the AMD part still maintains a comfortable lead.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across several key specifications. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core 5 211TE has 10 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks differ significantly: 3.20 GHz for AMD versus 1.70 GHz for Intel. Boost clocks are closer: 5.00 GHz versus 4.80 GHz.

Thermal design power differs by 10 watts: the AMD part is rated at 55 W while the Intel part is rated at 45 W. This modest TDP difference does not explain the massive performance gap, indicating architectural efficiency plays a larger role than raw power budget.

Cache configurations differ at L2 and L3. Both have 80 KB L1 per core. AMD uses 1 MB L2 per core while Intel uses 1.25 MB per core. AMD provides 64 MB shared L3 while Intel provides 20 MB shared L3. Memory support differs by type: AMD uses LPDDR5X only, while Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5. Memory bus width differs: quad-channel for AMD versus dual-channel for Intel. Memory bandwidth shows a 256.0 GB/s figure for AMD versus 76.8 GB/s for Intel.

PCIe generation differs: AMD provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes, Intel provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes. The process node differs: 4 nm TSMC for AMD versus 10 nm Intel for the Intel part. The die size is listed as 215 mm² for Intel, while no die size is recorded for AMD. Socket types differ: AMD Socket FP11 versus Intel Socket 1700. Release dates differ by one week: AMD on 2025-01-05 and Intel on 2025-01-12.

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 compare to the Intel Core 5 211TE in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The AMD part wins all multi-threaded tests by substantial margins. Cinebench R23 multicore shows AMD at 24828 versus Intel's 12201, a 103.5% delta. PassMark multithread shows AMD at 42912 versus 11685, a 267.2% delta. The advantages stem from the AMD part having 12 cores and 24 threads versus 10 cores and 16 threads, plus a significantly larger L3 cache and higher memory bandwidth.

Q: Is the Intel Core 5 211TE competitive in single-core performance?

A: The Intel part is closer in single-core tests but still loses. Cinebench R23 single-core shows AMD at 1976 versus Intel's 1722, a 14.8% delta. Cinebench R15 single-core shows a 75.1% delta with AMD at 303 and Intel at 173. PassMark single-thread shows AMD at 3967 versus 1408, a 181.7% delta. The Intel part's boost clock of 4.80 GHz helps, but the AMD part's 5.00 GHz boost and architecture efficiency still deliver higher scores.

Q: What explains the massive gap in data compression and encryption tests?

A: These tests benefit heavily from memory bandwidth and core scaling. AMD provides 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth with quad-channel LPDDR5X support, while Intel provides 76.8 GB/s with dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 support. Data compression shows AMD at 506170 versus 133434, a 279.3% delta. Data encryption shows AMD at 26027 versus 7231, a 259.9% delta. The 3.3x bandwidth advantage and additional cores directly impact these workloads.

Q: How do the two processors rank against all CPUs in the database?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 sits at the 93rd percentile with an average benchmark score of 63765. The Intel Core 5 211TE sits at the 69th percentile with an average benchmark score of 15370. The AMD part's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-13900KS at 64051 (-0.4% delta) and the AMD EPYC 7343 at 64202 (-0.7% delta). The Intel part's nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 7543 at 15477 (-0.7% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 3 7440U at 15682 (-2% delta).

Q: What are the process and architecture differences?

A: The AMD part uses Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, while the Intel part uses Bartlett Lake on a 10 nm Intel process. The AMD part has a 64 MB shared L3 cache versus Intel's 20 MB. The AMD part uses LPDDR5X memory with quad-channel support, while the Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel support. These differences contribute to the performance gap across all benchmark categories.

Q: Which processor has better integrated graphics?

A: The recorded data shows the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 uses the Radeon 8050S, while the Intel Core 5 211TE uses the UHD Graphics 730. No direct graphics benchmarks are recorded in the database for either processor, so the comparison is limited to the listed specifications.

The Verdict

The data indicates the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 is the dominant processor for virtually all compute-intensive workloads. Its 15 wins out of 15 head-to-head tests, combined with its 93rd percentile ranking versus the Intel part's 69th percentile, establishes a clear hierarchy. The AMD part delivers average benchmark scores of 63765, more than four times the Intel part's 15370 average.

For users prioritizing multi-threaded throughput, data compression, encryption, or floating-point math, the AMD part's advantages in core count, L3 cache size, and memory bandwidth provide overwhelming benefits. The margins range from 103.5% to 374.6% in these tests, indicating the AMD architecture extracts significantly more performance from its hardware resources.

For lightly threaded workloads, the Intel part narrows the gap but still loses. The Cinebench R23 single-core delta of 14.8% shows Intel's architecture is not without merit, but the AMD part's higher boost clock and superior per-core efficiency keep it ahead. Users who rely primarily on single-threaded applications would still find the AMD part faster, just not to the same degree as in parallel tasks.

The Intel Core 5 211TE does offer certain structural advantages that the data cannot quantify in benchmark terms. It provides Gen 5 PCIe support versus AMD's Gen 4, which could matter for future expansion. It also supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, offering flexibility in system configuration. The 215 mm² die size suggests a simpler manufacturing process, and its 45 W TDP is lower than AMD's 55 W.

The AMD part's launch MSRP is not recorded, while the Intel part carries a launch MSRP of $221. However, performance-per-dollar analysis is not possible from the recorded data alone. The benchmark results consistently favor the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 across every measured category, with no workload where the Intel part demonstrates superiority. Users requiring maximum performance in any of the tested areas should select the AMD processor, while the Intel part may appeal to those with specific platform requirements such as Gen 5 PCIe or dual-channel DDR4 compatibility.