Core Ultra 5 225F vs Ryzen AI Max PRO 385

Core Ultra 5 225F vs Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 Performance Spectrum

Core Ultra 5 225F

10 / 10

31,541

+0.1%

31,508

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Core Ultra 5 225F vs Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core Ultra 5 225F vs Ryzen AI Max PRO 385: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core Ultra 5 225F

2025

Why buy it

✅+3.3% higher Cinebench R23 multi-core.
✅20% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 32 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $231 MSRP, while Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Ryzen AI Max PRO 385

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +5.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+60% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Draws 55W instead of 65W, a 10W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon 8050S, while Core Ultra 5 225F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (16,500 vs 17,050).

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 5 225F better than Ryzen AI Max PRO 385?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is ahead with a 5.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core Ultra 5 225F pulls ahead with 3.3% better Cinebench R23 multi-core. Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 also has the bigger cache pool with 60% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 20 MB).

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core Ultra 5 225F is the stronger fit. You are getting 3.3% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 10 cores and 10 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core Ultra 5 225F is the better buy right now. Core Ultra 5 225F comes in at an unclear MSRP at $231 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 3.3% better Cinebench R23 multi-core. The compromise is that Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 5.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (136.5 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is the safer long-term CPU choice because it gives you more room to grow and a better platform outlook.

Core Ultra 5 225F vs Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core Ultra 5 225F

The Core Ultra 5 225F is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 7 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) architecture. It features 10 cores and 10 threads. Base frequency is 3.3 GHz, with boost up to 4.9 GHz. L3 cache: 20 MB (total). L2 cache: 3 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1851. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 31,541 points. Launch price was $231.

Ryzen AI Max PRO 385

The Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 6 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Strix Halo (2025) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 5 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: FP11. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 31,508 points. Launch price was $499.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core Ultra 5 225F packs 10 cores / 10 threads, while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Core Ultra 5 225F has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core Ultra 5 225F versus 5 GHz on the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 — a 2% clock advantage for the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 (base: 3.3 GHz vs 3.6 GHz). The Core Ultra 5 225F uses the Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) architecture (3 nm), while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 uses Strix Halo (2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 5 225F scores 31,541 against the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385's 31,508 — a 0.1% lead for the Core Ultra 5 225F. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 17,050 vs 16,500 (3.3% advantage for the Core Ultra 5 225F). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,653 vs 2,886, a 8.4% lead for the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 13,028 vs 14,136 (8.2% advantage for the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385). L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 5 225F vs 32 MB (total) on the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385.

Feature	Core Ultra 5 225F	Ryzen AI Max PRO 385
Cores / Threads	10 / 10+25%	8 / 16
Boost Clock	4.9 GHz	5 GHz+2%
Base Clock	3.3 GHz	3.6 GHz+9%
L3 Cache	20 MB (total)	32 MB (total)+60%
L2 Cache	3 MB (per core)+200%	1 MB (per core)
Process	3 nm-25%	4 nm
Architecture	Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)	Strix Halo (2025)
PassMark	31,541	31,508
Cinebench R23 Multi	17,050+3%	16,500
Geekbench 6 Single	2,653	2,886+9%
Geekbench 6 Multi	13,028	14,136+9%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core Ultra 5 225F uses the LGA1851 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 uses FP11 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-6400 on the Core Ultra 5 225F versus LPDDR5x-8000 on the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 — the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 supports 25% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core Ultra 5 225F supports up to 256 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core Ultra 5 225F) vs 8 (Ryzen AI Max PRO 385). PCIe lanes: 24 (Core Ultra 5 225F) vs 20 (Ryzen AI Max PRO 385) — the Core Ultra 5 225F offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Z890,B860 (Core Ultra 5 225F) and Strix Halo platform (Ryzen AI Max PRO 385).

Feature	Core Ultra 5 225F	Ryzen AI Max PRO 385
Socket	LGA1851	FP11
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-6400	LPDDR5x-8000+25%
Max RAM Capacity	256 GB+100%	128 GB
RAM Channels	2	8+300%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	24+20%	20

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core Ultra 5 225F) vs AMD-V (Ryzen AI Max PRO 385). The Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 includes integrated graphics (Radeon 8050S), while the Core Ultra 5 225F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 targets Enterprise AI Mobile. Direct competitor: Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 rivals M3 Max.