AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 vs Intel Core 5 320 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data shows a decisive overall advantage for the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390. Across 15 head-to-head comparisons, the AMD part wins 13, while the Intel Core 5 320 takes two. The margin in the multi-threaded tests is substantial, frequently reaching hundreds of percentage points.

The largest single delta appears in the PassMark integer math test. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 scores 148,508, while the Intel Core 5 320 scores 32,323. This results in a delta of 359.4% in favor of the AMD processor. This pattern repeats in Cinebench multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD chip scores 24,828 against Intel's 6,197, a 300.6% advantage. Similarly, Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 3,918 versus 1,054, a 271.7% delta.

Other heavy multi-threaded wins for the AMD part include data compression (506,170 versus 148,779, a 240.2% delta), random string sorting (55,248 versus 18,038, a 206.3% delta), and extended instructions (40,888 versus 13,262, a 208.3% delta). Prime number finding also shows a large gap: 323 versus 110, which is 193.6% higher. The multithread passmark score is 42,912 against 15,450, a 177.7% delta.

The AMD processor also leads in floating-point math (94,666 versus 42,440, a 123.1% delta) and data encryption (26,027 versus 10,984, a 137% delta). Physics simulation results show 2,773 versus 1,221, a 127.1% delta. Even the Cinebench R15 single-core test, which is usually closer, favors the AMD part: 303 versus 276, a 9.8% delta.

The Intel Core 5 320 secures its two wins in the PassMark single-threaded tests, which are listed twice under slightly different test names but show identical scores. Here, Intel scores 4,045 against AMD's 3,967. The delta is -1.9%, favoring Intel. This is the only area where the Intel chip demonstrates a lead, and the margin is small. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the AMD part still wins, though narrowly, at 1,976 versus 1,926, a 2.6% delta.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 has an average benchmark score of 63,765, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 5 320 has an average score of 18,023, placing it in the 72nd percentile.

Q: How does the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The database shows it sits close to several high-end desktop and mobile parts. It is 0.4% behind the Intel Core i9-13900KS, 0.7% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G, 0.7% behind the AMD EPYC 7343, and 0.9% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX.

Q: How does the Intel Core 5 320 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core 5 320 is positioned among older desktop and mobile chips. It is 0.2% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 1600, 0.7% ahead of the Intel Core 5 120U, 0.7% behind the Intel Core i5-1334U, and 0.7% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT.

Q: What is the difference in core and thread counts?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core 5 320 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: Which processor has the higher clock speed?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 has a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel Core 5 320 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 supports quad-channel LPDDR5X memory with a bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. The Intel Core 5 320 supports single-channel DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory with a bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 uses the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Strix Halo, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core 5 320 uses the Wildcat Lake codename on a 3 nm process at Intel. The AMD part is part of the Ryzen AI Max PRO generation, while the Intel chip belongs to the Core 5 generation.

Cache allocation differs significantly. The AMD processor provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and a large 64 MB shared L3 cache. The Intel processor lists a total of 192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2, and 6 MB shared L3 cache. This larger L3 cache on the AMD side is a major architectural distinction that supports its multi-threaded performance advantage.

Memory architecture also separates the two. The AMD chip uses a quad-channel memory bus, while the Intel chip uses a single-channel bus. This contributes to the wide gap in memory bandwidth. The AMD part also supports ECC memory, which the Intel part does not. The AMD processor's integrated graphics is the Radeon 8050S, while the Intel part uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. PCIe lane counts differ as well: the AMD part has Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), and the Intel part has Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). The AMD part's socket is AMD Socket FP11, while the Intel part uses Intel BGA 1516. The Intel processor has a launch MSRP of $340; no launch MSRP is listed for the AMD processor.

Specification Differences

The core count is a primary difference: 12 cores and 24 threads for AMD versus 6 cores and 6 threads for Intel. The Intel part has no hyper-threading, so its thread count equals its core count. Base clocks are 3.20 GHz for AMD and 1.50 GHz for Intel. Boost clocks are 5.00 GHz for AMD and 4.60 GHz for Intel. The thermal design power also differs: 55 for AMD and 15 for Intel.

The memory support lists LPDDR5X for AMD and DDR5 plus LPDDR5X for Intel. The memory bus is quad-channel for AMD and single-channel for Intel. Memory bandwidth is 256.0 GB/s for AMD and 59.7 GB/s for Intel. ECC memory is supported on AMD but not on Intel. The PCIe configuration is Gen 4 with 16 lanes for AMD and Gen 4 with 6 lanes for Intel. The process node is 4 nm for AMD and 3 nm for Intel. The foundry is TSMC for AMD and Intel for Intel. The integrated graphics are Radeon 8050S versus Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe). The release dates differ: 2025-01-05 for AMD and 2026-04-15 for Intel. The part numbers are 100-000001421 for AMD and SAE3H for Intel. The market segment for both is Mobile.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear performance hierarchy. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 delivers far superior multi-threaded performance across nearly every measured workload. Its average benchmark score of 63,765 is significantly higher than the Intel Core 5 320's 18,023. The AMD processor also ranks in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, compared to the Intel processor's 72nd percentile.

The only area where the Intel Core 5 320 takes the lead is in PassMark single-thread performance, with a score of 4,045 versus 3,967, a 1.9% margin. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the AMD part still wins, 1,976 versus 1,926. The Intel part's wins are narrow, while the AMD part's wins in multi-threaded tests are often over 100% and sometimes over 300%.

The Intel Core 5 320 does carry a lower TDP of 15 compared to the AMD part's 55. It also has a listed launch MSRP of $340. The database does not include a launch MSRP for the AMD part. The Intel chip is built on a smaller 3 nm process versus the AMD chip's 4 nm process.

For users selecting a processor strictly on benchmark data, the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 is the stronger choice for heavy multi-threaded workloads. The Intel Core 5 320 shows a slight edge in single-thread passmark scores and offers a lower power envelope in its specifications.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 wins in every multi-threaded application measured. This includes video encoding or rendering workloads that rely on Cinebench scores, where it leads by 271.7% in R15 and 300.6% in R23. It also dominates in integer-heavy tasks, as shown by the 359.4% delta in PassMark integer math. Data compression, encryption, extended instruction sets, prime number finding, floating-point math, physics simulation, and random string sorting all favor the AMD part. Its large 64 MB shared L3 cache and quad-channel memory bus appear to support these outcomes.

The Intel Core 5 320 wins specifically in the PassMark single-thread test, where it scores 4,045 against 3,967. This is a small but consistent lead over the AMD chip. Its lower TDP of 15 watts also suggests a different power profile. In the recorded data, it does not win any of the multi-threaded tests. Its closest single-core comparison in Cinebench R23 shows the AMD part ahead by 2.6%, so the Intel single-thread advantage does not carry over to all single-threaded tests.