AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 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 495 has no benchmark scores listed. This makes a direct numerical comparison impossible across the full test suite. The Intel part's data shows a strong mid-range mobile performer, with an average benchmark score of 28,574 and a percentile ranking of 80 against all CPUs in the database.

The Intel Core 5 220H delivers its most impressive results in multi-threaded workloads. Cinebench R23 multi-core returns 11,198 points, while Cinebench R20 multi-core scores 7,812. The PassMark multithread test records 21,884. These figures position the chip comfortably within the upper tier of mobile processors, as confirmed by its 80th percentile standing.

Single-thread performance is equally solid. Cinebench R23 single-core scores 1,853, Cinebench R20 single-core scores 1,102, and Cinebench R15 single-core scores 262. The PassMark single-thread test records 3,405. These numbers indicate a well-balanced design capable of handling lightly threaded applications without sacrificing responsiveness.

Specialized workloads reveal specific strengths. The PassMark data compression test returns 247,921, which is the highest raw score in the Intel profile. Data encryption records 15,216, extended instructions score 14,642, and floating point math reaches 51,671. Integer math posts 73,555. The physics test scores 1,478, while random string sorting produces 28,438. The find prime numbers test is the outlier at 82, a result that reflects the nature of that particular workload rather than a systemic weakness.

The nearest rivals in the database provide context for these scores. The AMD EPYC 7203P averages 28,583, a 0% delta from the Intel part. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850HS averages 28,549, just 0.1% behind. The Intel Xeon E-2436 averages 28,530, 0.2% behind. The Intel Core i5-12600 averages 28,646, which places it 0.3% ahead of the Core 5 220H. These four comparisons bracket the chip tightly, showing that it sits in a crowded performance band where small percentage differences separate products from different market segments and generations.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 has no benchmark entries in the database, so its head-to-head results are absent. The wins counter shows 0 for both parts, confirming that no comparative test data exists for this pairing. The analysis must therefore rely on architectural specifications and the Intel part's standalone measurements.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge sharply in their underlying designs. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 uses the Gorgon Halo codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO generation built on Zen 5. It is manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core 5 220H uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-H, and belongs to the Core 5 generation labeled Raptor Lake Refresh. It is built on a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundries.

Core counts differ substantially. The AMD chip has 16 cores and 32 threads. The Intel chip has 12 cores and 16 threads. This 4-core and 16-thread advantage for AMD suggests a significant lead in heavily parallel workloads, though no benchmark scores exist to confirm the magnitude. The Intel part's thread count of 16 matches its core count, indicating that it does not employ simultaneous multithreading, while the AMD part's 32 threads from 16 cores confirms it does.

Clock speeds favor AMD as well. The Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 has a base clock of 3.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The Core 5 220H has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The AMD part runs 0.40 GHz higher at base and 0.30 GHz higher at boost.

Cache configurations show different design philosophies. Both parts provide 80 KB of L1 cache per core. The L2 allocation differs: AMD gives 1 MB per core, while Intel gives 2 MB per core. The L3 cache tells a different story. AMD pools 64 MB of L3, while Intel provides 18 MB shared. The AMD total of 64 MB L3 is more than three times the Intel allocation, which could benefit workloads with large working sets that fit in cache.

Memory support further separates the two. The AMD processor uses LPDDR5X memory across a quad-channel bus, delivering 273.1 GB/s of bandwidth. It also supports ECC memory. The Intel processor supports both DDR4 and DDR5 across a dual-channel bus, with no ECC support and no bandwidth figure recorded in the database. The AMD memory subsystem offers double the channel count and a specific bandwidth advantage, though the Intel part's compatibility with older DDR4 modules could matter for system cost considerations in some configurations.

PCIe support also differs. The AMD part uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes for the CPU. The Intel part uses Gen 5 with 8 lanes for the CPU. Intel's newer PCIe generation provides higher per-lane bandwidth, but AMD provides double the lane count. The practical implications depend on the devices connected and their bandwidth requirements.

Integrated graphics present a major differentiator. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 includes a Radeon 8065S GPU. The Intel Core 5 220H includes Iris Xe Graphics with 80 execution units. The Radeon part is positioned as a high-end integrated solution, while the Iris Xe 80EU is a mainstream offering. No graphics benchmarks appear in the database, so the performance gap cannot be quantified.

Power and physical specifications also differ. The AMD chip has a TDP of 55 watts and uses AMD Socket FP11. The Intel chip has a TDP of 45 watts and uses Intel BGA 1744. The AMD die size is recorded as 2x 70.6 mm², reflecting a chiplet design, while the Intel die size is not recorded. The AMD part was released on 2026-05-19, while the Intel part was released on 2024-12-17, making the Intel chip roughly a year and a half older. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $342; the AMD part has no recorded MSRP. Both are mobile-market parts with locked multipliers. The AMD part number is 100-000002124; the Intel part number is SRQ6SQ5MM.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 220H has confirmed wins in every benchmark category where data exists, simply because it is the only part with recorded scores. Its 80th percentile ranking places it above the majority of all CPUs in the database. The nearest rival data shows it trading blows with server and desktop parts: the AMD EPYC 7203P matches it exactly at 0% delta, the Ryzen 7 PRO 6850HS trails by 0.1%, the Xeon E-2436 trails by 0.2%, and the Core i5-12600 leads by 0.3%. These deltas are small enough that run-to-run variation could reorder the results, but the overall picture is consistent: the Core 5 220H performs at the level of a recent mid-range desktop processor.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 has no benchmark entries, so its wins are inferred from specifications rather than measurements. The 16-core, 32-thread configuration with a 5.20 GHz boost clock and 64 MB of L3 cache suggests it would dominate multi-threaded rendering, compilation, and scientific workloads. The quad-channel LPDDR5X memory with 273.1 GB/s of bandwidth points to advantages in memory-bandwidth-sensitive applications such as large dataset processing and integrated graphics workloads. The Radeon 8065S integrated GPU likely provides substantially better gaming and compute performance than the Iris Xe 80EU, though no data confirms this.

Use cases split along clear lines. For users who need confirmed, measured performance in a 45-watt envelope, the Intel part delivers proven results across Cinebench and PassMark suites. For users who prioritize maximum core count, highest boost clock, larger cache, and superior memory bandwidth, the AMD part offers a stronger specification sheet, subject to the absence of benchmark validation.

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core 5 220H compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The Core 5 220H averages 28,574. The AMD EPYC 7203P averages 28,583 (0% delta), the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850HS averages 28,549 (0.1% behind), the Intel Xeon E-2436 averages 28,530 (0.2% behind), and the Intel Core i5-12600 averages 28,646 (0.3% ahead).

Q: What is the core and thread configuration of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 has 16 cores and 32 threads. The Intel Core 5 220H has 12 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What memory types do the two processors support?

A: The AMD part supports LPDDR5X memory on a quad-channel bus with 273.1 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support. The Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus with no ECC support and no bandwidth figure recorded.

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 220H boosts to 4.90 GHz.

Q: What are the manufacturing processes for each chip?

A: The AMD processor uses a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel processor uses a 10 nm process at Intel.

Q: What integrated graphics do these processors include?

A: The AMD part includes a Radeon 8065S. The Intel part includes Iris Xe Graphics with 80 execution units.

The Verdict

The database contains a complete performance profile for the Intel Core 5 220H and none for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495. Every measured result in this comparison belongs to the Intel chip. It achieves an 80th percentile ranking, scores 11,198 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 1,853 in Cinebench R23 single-core, and 247,921 in PassMark data compression. Its nearest rivals sit within 0.3% of its average score, confirming that it delivers competitive mid-range performance with a 45-watt TDP.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 495 offers a superior specification sheet on paper: 16 cores and 32 threads versus 12 cores and 16 threads, a 5.20 GHz boost clock versus 4.90 GHz, 64 MB of L3 cache versus 18 MB, quad-channel LPDDR5X memory with 273.1 GB/s bandwidth versus dual-channel DDR4/DDR5, and a Radeon 8065S integrated GPU versus Iris Xe 80EU. It also uses a more advanced 4 nm TSMC process versus Intel's 10 nm node, and it supports ECC memory. These architectural advantages suggest it would outperform the Intel part in multi-threaded and bandwidth-intensive workloads, but no benchmark data exists to confirm this.

The Intel Core 5 220H is the only part in this comparison with verified results. Users who require measured performance data should treat the Intel chip as the validated option. The AMD part remains an unproven specification sheet, promising more cores, more cache, faster memory, and a newer process, but delivering no recorded scores. The verdict depends on whether the user values confirmed results or architectural potential. The data supports the Intel chip today; the AMD chip's advantages remain theoretical until benchmarks appear in the database.