AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 vs Intel Core 5 120UL Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The available benchmark data splits cleanly between the two processors, but only one side has recorded results. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 carries no benchmark entries in the database, meaning its performance profile must be inferred from architectural specifications rather than measured scores. The Intel Core 5 120UL, by contrast, has a full suite of Cinebench and PassMark results, all of which represent its wins by default. This is not a competitive comparison in the traditional sense; it is a documentation of one processor's measured output against another's theoretical capabilities.

The Intel Core 5 120UL wins every recorded benchmark category because it is the only one with data. In multi-threaded workloads, its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 8974 indicates strong sustained throughput for a 15 TDP part. Single-thread performance is less impressive, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1266, but it still registers. PassMark results show a balanced profile: integer math at 38060, floating point math at 26311, and data compression at 109090. The AMD part, lacking any benchmark scores, cannot claim a single recorded win. Its percentile rank of 50 against all CPUs suggests a mid-pack standing, while the Intel part sits at percentile 68, placing it above the majority of tested processors.

The use-case split is therefore one-sided. For any workload where a measured score exists, the Intel Core 5 120UL is the only option with evidence. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495, with its 16 cores and 32 threads, would logically favor heavily threaded tasks like rendering or scientific computation, but the database contains no numbers to confirm this. The Intel part, with 10 cores and 12 threads, shows it can handle multi-threaded applications, but its architecture targets efficiency rather than raw core counts. The data does not support a split; it supports a single documented competitor.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies and manufacturing generations. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 uses the Gorgon Halo codename, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It belongs to the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO generation, specifically Zen 5, and integrates 16 cores with 32 threads. Its base clock is 3.10 GHz, boosting to 5.20 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a large 64 MB L3 cache. Memory support is LPDDR5X over a quad-channel bus, yielding a memory bandwidth of 273.1 GB/s. ECC memory is supported. The integrated graphics are Radeon 8065S. The socket is AMD Socket FP11, and PCIe connectivity is Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes. The package uses two chiplets, each measuring 70.6 mm².

The Intel Core 5 120UL uses Raptor Lake-PS architecture, built on a 10 nm process at Intel. It has 10 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 1.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. Cache includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. Memory support is DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, with no recorded memory bandwidth figure. ECC memory is not supported. Integrated graphics are Iris Xe Graphics 80EU. The socket is Intel Socket 1700, and PCIe is Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes. The TDP is 15, compared to the AMD part's 55.

The node difference is significant: 4 nm versus 10 nm. The AMD part also has a much larger L3 cache (64 MB versus 12 MB), double the memory channels, and over four times the memory bandwidth. The Intel part has a higher L2 per core (1.25 MB versus 1 MB) but fewer cores and threads. The AMD part supports ECC, the Intel part does not. The AMD part uses a quad-channel memory bus, the Intel part dual-channel. These are fundamental architectural divides: one is a high-core-count, high-bandwidth mobile processor; the other is a low-power desktop part designed for efficiency.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Direct head-to-head results are absent from the database, so the comparison relies solely on the Intel part's recorded scores against the AMD part's lack of them. The Intel Core 5 120UL's Cinebench R15 multicore score is 904, with a single-core score of 127. Its Cinebench R20 multicore score is 3769, and single-core is 531. The R23 results, as noted, are 8974 multicore and 1266 single-core. These numbers show a processor that scales reasonably with thread count but does not excel in single-thread tasks; the ratio of multicore to single-core in R23 is roughly 7.1 times, indicating effective parallelization.

PassMark results add depth. The multithread score is 10558, and the single-thread score is 2080. Data compression reaches 109090, data encryption 7685, and extended instructions 5203. Prime number finding is a weak point at 47, while random string sorting hits 13610. Physics simulation scores 807. Floating point math at 26311 and integer math at 38060 show a processor that handles arithmetic well. The average benchmark score is 13594, with nearest rivals including the Intel Core i3-12100F at 13494 (0.7% higher), the Intel Core 3 N355 at 13492 (0.8% higher), the Intel Core i5-9500 at 13452 (1.1% higher), and the Intel Core 3 304 at 13745 (1.1% lower).

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 has no benchmark scores to compare. Its 16 cores and 32 threads would presumably outpace the Intel part in multi-threaded Cinebench tests, given that the Intel part's 10 cores and 12 threads produce an R23 multicore score of 8974. The AMD part's 5.20 GHz boost clock versus the Intel part's 4.60 GHz also suggests a single-thread advantage, but no numbers confirm this. The data shows only one side of the ledger, and that side belongs entirely to Intel.

The Verdict

The data supports one clear conclusion: the Intel Core 5 120UL is the only processor in this comparison with measured performance. Its benchmark scores, while modest, are real and reproducible. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495, despite its superior specifications on paper, has no recorded results, making any performance claim impossible to verify from the database. For a user who relies on benchmark evidence, the Intel part is the only defensible choice. Its percentile rank of 68 versus the AMD part's 50 further reinforces this, though the AMD part's lack of scores means its percentile is based on incomplete data.

The architectural specifications of the AMD part suggest it would win in multi-threaded and memory-intensive scenarios. The 64 MB L3 cache, 273.1 GB/s memory bandwidth, and 16 cores are all indicators of high performance. But indicators are not measurements. The Intel part, with its 12 MB L3 and dual-channel memory, is clearly a lower-tier product in raw capability. Yet it has the advantage of documented results. In a benchmark database, evidence trumps speculation. The Intel Core 5 120UL wins because it showed up; the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 wins no categories because it has no data.

For workloads like data compression or integer math, the Intel part's scores are the only reference points. For rendering or compilation, the AMD part's core count implies superiority, but the absence of scores leaves that implication unverified. The verdict is not about which processor is faster; it is about which processor has proven itself in the database. That processor is the Intel Core 5 120UL.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 has 16 cores and 32 threads. The Intel Core 5 120UL has 10 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD part has a quad-channel LPDDR5X bus with 273.1 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part uses dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 with no recorded bandwidth figure.

Q: Does the Intel Core 5 120UL support ECC memory?

A: No. The Intel part does not support ECC. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 does support ECC memory.

Q: What is the Intel part's best Cinebench score?

A: The Intel Core 5 120UL's highest recorded Cinebench score is 8974 in R23 multicore. Its R23 single-core score is 1266.

Q: How does the Intel part compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core 5 120UL has an average benchmark score of 13594. It is 0.7% ahead of the Intel Core i3-12100F, 0.8% ahead of the Intel Core 3 N355, 1.1% ahead of the Intel Core i5-9500, and 1.1% behind the Intel Core 3 304.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 boosts to 5.20 GHz. The Intel Core 5 120UL boosts to 4.60 GHz.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 | Intel Core 5 120UL |

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

| Cores | 16 | 10 |

| Threads | 32 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 3.10 GHz | 1.30 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.20 GHz | 4.60 GHz |

| TDP | 55 | 15 |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Codename | Gorgon Halo | Raptor Lake-PS |

| Generation | Ryzen AI Max+ PRO (Zen 5) | Core 5 (Raptor Lake-PS) |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1.25 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 64 MB | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Quad-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 273.1 GB/s | Not recorded |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 8 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 8065S | Iris Xe Graphics 80EU |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP11 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2026-05-19 | 2024-04-07 |

| Part Number | 100-000002124 | Unknown |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | No |

| Production Status | Active | Active |

| Die Size | 2x 70.6 mm² | Not recorded |

| Percentile vs All CPUs | 50 | 68 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 0 | 13594 |