AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 vs Intel Core 5 220H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains a complete benchmark profile for the Intel Core 5 220H, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 has no individual benchmark scores listed. Consequently, the head-to-head comparison relies entirely on the Intel part's measured results, with the AMD processor's position inferred from its architectural specifications and overall percentile standing.

The Intel Core 5 220H demonstrates strong multi-threaded performance in Cinebench testing. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 11,198 points places it in a competitive position among mobile processors. The single-core result of 1,853 points in the same test indicates a robust per-thread capability that supports responsive everyday operation. In Cinebench R20, the processor scores 7,812 multi-core and 1,102 single-core, while the older R15 test shows 1,835 multi-core and 262 single-core. These results form a consistent pattern across the Cinebench suite, suggesting that the processor scales well from lightly threaded to fully loaded workloads.

PassMark testing reveals specific strengths in data-oriented tasks. The data compression score of 247,921 is exceptionally high, indicating that the processor handles compression algorithms with considerable efficiency. Data encryption reaches 15,216, and extended instructions score 14,642. Integer math performance is strong at 73,555, while floating-point math reaches 51,671. The multithread score of 21,884 confirms that all 16 threads are utilized effectively when the workload demands it. Random string sorting completes at 28,438, and physics calculations score 1,478. Find prime numbers, a test sensitive to integer throughput, records a modest 82, which is typical for this particular benchmark's scoring scale.

The single-thread PassMark score of 3,405 appears twice in the database, once labeled as "single_thread" and once as "singlethread", confirming the measurement's reliability. This figure places the Intel processor in a solid position for single-threaded applications such as legacy software or lightly threaded games.

For the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 485, the absence of benchmark scores means no direct numerical comparison is possible from the recorded data. The database assigns it a percentile rank of 50 among all CPUs, while the Intel Core 5 220H holds a percentile rank of 80. This percentile gap indicates that the Intel processor sits in a higher overall performance tier based on aggregate database results, even though the AMD part has no individual scores to verify its standing.

The Intel processor's average benchmark score of 28,574 is the only numerical anchor for comparison. Its nearest rivals in the database are the AMD EPYC 7203P at 28,583 (0% delta), the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850HS at 28,549 (0.1% delta), the Intel Xeon E-2436 at 28,530 (0.2% delta), and the Intel Core i5-12600 at 28,646 (-0.3% delta). These margins are extremely tight, all within 0.3% of the Core 5 220H, indicating that the processor delivers performance essentially equivalent to a mid-range EPYC server chip, a recent Ryzen PRO mobile part, a Xeon workstation processor, and a desktop Core i5 from a previous generation. The near-zero deltas mean that in aggregate database scoring, the Core 5 220H is statistically indistinguishable from these four rivals.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear distinction between these two processors, but only one side has measured results. The Intel Core 5 220H is a fully characterized part with 17 benchmark scores, a percentile rank of 80, and an average score of 28,574. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 has no benchmark scores and a percentile rank of 50. Based strictly on these figures, the Intel processor holds a substantial advantage in the database's overall ranking, sitting 30 percentile points higher.

For users selecting a processor based on recorded measurements, the Intel Core 5 220H is the only option with verified performance data. Its multi-core Cinebench scores and PassMark multithread result of 21,884 indicate a capable 16-thread processor for productivity workloads. The single-thread score of 3,405 in PassMark and 1,853 in Cinebench R23 suggest that it also handles lightly threaded tasks competently.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 cannot be recommended on the basis of benchmark evidence, as no scores exist in the database. Its percentile rank of 50 is informational but not a substitute for actual measurements. The processor's architectural specifications, discussed in the next section, suggest it may have strengths in specific areas, but without recorded scores, any performance claim would be speculative.

The database's nearest-rival data for the Intel part shows that it competes directly with the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850HS, differing by only 0.1% in average score. This is a meaningful comparison because both are mobile processors, and the near-identical scores indicate that the Core 5 220H delivers performance on par with a well-established Ryzen PRO mobile chip. The other rivals, including the EPYC 7203P and Xeon E-2436, are server or workstation parts, but the score deltas remain negligible.

In summary, the Intel Core 5 220H is the verified performer in this comparison. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 remains an unmeasured quantity, and the database's percentile ranking favors Intel by a wide margin.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge significantly in their underlying designs. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 uses the Gorgon Halo codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI Max PRO generation built on Zen 5 architecture. It is manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 70.6 mm². The Intel Core 5 220H uses Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-H codename, and belongs to the Core 5 generation from the Raptor Lake Refresh. It is built on a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry.

Core counts differ considerably. The AMD processor has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel processor has 12 cores and 16 threads. Both parts support 16 threads, but they achieve this differently: AMD uses simultaneous multithreading on 8 physical cores, while Intel uses a combination of performance and efficiency cores to reach 12 physical cores with 16 threads. The Intel part's 12-core design suggests a hybrid arrangement typical of Raptor Lake, though the database does not specify the exact core type distribution.

Cache hierarchies are distinct. Both processors have 80 KB of L1 cache per core. The L2 cache differs: AMD provides 1 MB per core, while Intel provides 2 MB per core. The L3 cache is shared, with AMD offering 32 MB and Intel offering 18 MB. This gives the AMD processor a 14 MB advantage in shared L3, which can benefit workloads that repeatedly access a large working set. The Intel processor's larger per-core L2 may help with more localized data access patterns.

Clock speeds favor AMD. The Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel Core 5 220H has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The AMD part's higher base clock suggests better sustained performance at low thread counts, while the 100 MHz boost advantage is modest.

Thermal design power differs by 10 watts. The AMD processor has a TDP of 55 watts, while the Intel processor has a TDP of 45 watts. This means the AMD part is rated for higher power draw, which could allow it to sustain higher clocks under load, but it also implies greater cooling requirements.

Memory support is a major differentiator. The AMD processor supports LPDDR5X memory with a quad-channel bus, delivering a memory bandwidth of 273.1 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory. The Intel processor supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus, and the database lists no memory bandwidth figure. It does not support ECC memory. The AMD part's quad-channel LPDDR5X configuration provides substantially higher theoretical bandwidth, which can benefit integrated graphics and memory-intensive compute workloads.

PCIe capabilities favor Intel in version number but AMD in lane count. The Intel processor supports PCIe Gen 5 with 8 lanes from the CPU, while the AMD processor supports PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes. The Intel part's newer PCIe generation offers higher per-lane bandwidth, but the AMD part offers twice as many lanes, which could be advantageous for multi-device configurations.

Integrated graphics differ. The AMD processor includes a Radeon 8050S, while the Intel processor includes Iris Xe Graphics with 80 execution units. The database provides no benchmark scores for either GPU, so no performance comparison is possible from the recorded data.

Sockets are incompatible. The AMD processor uses AMD Socket FP11, while the Intel processor uses Intel BGA 1744. The AMD processor's release date is May 19, 2026, while the Intel processor's release date is December 17, 2024. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $342, stated here once as recorded. The AMD part has no launch MSRP listed.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core 5 220H has 12 cores, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 has 8 cores. Both processors support 16 threads.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 supports LPDDR5X with a quad-channel bus and 273.1 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 5 220H supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus, and no bandwidth figure is recorded for it.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 has a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, which is 100 MHz higher than the Intel Core 5 220H's boost clock of 4.90 GHz.

Q: How do the processors compare in the database's overall ranking?

A: The Intel Core 5 220H holds a percentile rank of 80 among all CPUs, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 holds a percentile rank of 50. The Intel part also has an average benchmark score of 28,574, while the AMD part has no recorded benchmark scores.

Q: What L3 cache sizes do the processors use?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 has 32 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core 5 220H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 5 220H does not support ECC memory.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 220H wins in every category where measured data exists, because the AMD processor has no benchmark scores in the database. The Intel part's verified strengths include multi-threaded rendering, as shown by Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 11,198, and data compression, as shown by the PassMark data compression score of 247,921. These results indicate that the Intel processor is well suited for content creation tasks that use all available threads, such as video encoding or 3D rendering.

The Intel processor also wins on single-thread performance based on its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1,853 and PassMark single-thread score of 3,405. Applications that rely on high per-core performance, such as many productivity tools and older software, would benefit from this capability. The consistent Cinebench scaling from R15 to R23 confirms that the processor maintains its relative position across different versions of the benchmark.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 wins on architectural specifications that suggest potential advantages, though no scores confirm them. Its 32 MB of L3 cache exceeds the Intel part's 18 MB, which could benefit workloads with large working sets. Its 273.1 GB/s memory bandwidth is far higher than what the Intel part's dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 configuration can likely achieve, though the Intel bandwidth is not recorded. This bandwidth advantage would primarily benefit the integrated Radeon 8050S graphics and any compute tasks that are memory-bandwidth limited.

The AMD processor's higher base clock of 3.60 GHz versus 2.70 GHz suggests it may sustain better performance in lightly threaded workloads that do not boost to maximum clocks. Its 55 watt TDP, 10 watts higher than the Intel part, indicates it is designed to draw more power and potentially sustain higher performance under continuous load, provided the cooling solution can handle the additional heat.

The Intel processor's 12 physical cores provide an advantage in workloads that scale with core count but are limited by thread scheduling on hybrid architectures. Its 2 MB per-core L2 cache is double the AMD part's 1 MB per core, which may improve performance for workloads with high locality in their data access patterns.

The Intel processor's PCIe Gen 5 support with 8 lanes offers higher per-device bandwidth for a single fast device, such as a modern SSD. The AMD processor's PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes offers more total connectivity for multiple devices, such as several SSDs or accelerators.

In the database's aggregate scoring, the Intel Core 5 220H's percentile rank of 80 versus the AMD part's rank of 50 is the definitive statement. The Intel processor is positioned in the top fifth of all CPUs, while the AMD processor sits at the median. The nearest-rival comparison for the Intel part shows it trading blows with the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850HS at a 0.1% delta, confirming that the Intel part is competitive with a well-known Ryzen PRO mobile processor. No such comparison exists for the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 485, as its nearest-rivals list is empty.