
Core Ultra 5 225
Popular choices:

Ryzen AI Max PRO 385
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.
Core Ultra 5 225
2025Why buy it
- ✅+3.2% higher Cinebench R23 multi-core.
- ✅20% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Intel Laminar RM2), unlike Ryzen AI Max PRO 385.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 32 MB).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $240 MSRP, while Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
Ryzen AI Max PRO 385
2025Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +9.9% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+60% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 20 MB).
- ✅Draws 55W instead of 65W, a 10W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (16,500 vs 17,020).
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core Ultra 5 225.
Core Ultra 5 225
2025Ryzen AI Max PRO 385
2025Why buy it
- ✅+3.2% higher Cinebench R23 multi-core.
- ✅20% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Intel Laminar RM2), unlike Ryzen AI Max PRO 385.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +9.9% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+60% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 20 MB).
- ✅Draws 55W instead of 65W, a 10W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 32 MB).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $240 MSRP, while Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (16,500 vs 17,020).
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core Ultra 5 225.
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 better than Core Ultra 5 225?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Games Benchmarks
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Core Ultra 5 225 | Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 256 FPS | 277 FPS |
| medium | 244 FPS | 243 FPS |
| high | 208 FPS | 209 FPS |
| ultra | 176 FPS | 179 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 219 FPS | 233 FPS |
| medium | 187 FPS | 185 FPS |
| high | 154 FPS | 153 FPS |
| ultra | 133 FPS | 134 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 150 FPS | 162 FPS |
| medium | 127 FPS | 129 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 100 FPS |
| ultra | 86 FPS | 86 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core Ultra 5 225 | Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 603 FPS | 684 FPS |
| medium | 512 FPS | 565 FPS |
| high | 421 FPS | 460 FPS |
| ultra | 378 FPS | 417 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 501 FPS | 591 FPS |
| medium | 441 FPS | 514 FPS |
| high | 372 FPS | 422 FPS |
| ultra | 319 FPS | 360 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 301 FPS | 352 FPS |
| medium | 266 FPS | 311 FPS |
| high | 248 FPS | 286 FPS |
| ultra | 218 FPS | 251 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core Ultra 5 225 | Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 778 FPS | 788 FPS |
| medium | 680 FPS | 788 FPS |
| high | 609 FPS | 706 FPS |
| ultra | 522 FPS | 594 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 725 FPS | 788 FPS |
| medium | 588 FPS | 644 FPS |
| high | 515 FPS | 559 FPS |
| ultra | 439 FPS | 472 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 504 FPS | 562 FPS |
| medium | 422 FPS | 459 FPS |
| high | 377 FPS | 408 FPS |
| ultra | 318 FPS | 338 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core Ultra 5 225 | Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 778 FPS | 788 FPS |
| medium | 778 FPS | 788 FPS |
| high | 777 FPS | 788 FPS |
| ultra | 699 FPS | 781 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 778 FPS | 788 FPS |
| medium | 716 FPS | 768 FPS |
| high | 623 FPS | 673 FPS |
| ultra | 547 FPS | 590 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 560 FPS | 609 FPS |
| medium | 510 FPS | 541 FPS |
| high | 457 FPS | 486 FPS |
| ultra | 402 FPS | 426 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core Ultra 5 225 and Ryzen AI Max PRO 385

Core Ultra 5 225
Core Ultra 5 225
The Core Ultra 5 225 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: 31,137 points. Launch price was $246.


Ryzen AI Max PRO 385
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 5 225 packs 10 cores / 10 threads, while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Core Ultra 5 225 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core Ultra 5 225 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 5 225 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 5 225 scores 31,137 against the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385's 31,508 — a 1.2% lead for the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 17,020 vs 16,500 (3.1% advantage for the Core Ultra 5 225). 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 5 225 vs 32 MB (total) on the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385.
| Feature | Core Ultra 5 225 | 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 | 31,137 | 31,508+1% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 17,020+3% | 16,500 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 2,653 | 2,886+9% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 13,028 | 14,136+9% |
Memory & Platform
The Core Ultra 5 225 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. Both support up to DDR5-6400 memory speed. The Core Ultra 5 225 supports up to 256 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core Ultra 5 225) vs 8 (Ryzen AI Max PRO 385). PCIe lanes: 24 (Core Ultra 5 225) vs 20 (Ryzen AI Max PRO 385) — the Core Ultra 5 225 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Z890,B860,H810 (Core Ultra 5 225) and Strix Halo platform (Ryzen AI Max PRO 385).
| Feature | Core Ultra 5 225 | Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1851 | FP11 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-6400 | LPDDR5x-8000 |
| 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. Only the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core Ultra 5 225) vs AMD-V (Ryzen AI Max PRO 385). Both include integrated graphics — Intel Arc Graphics (2 Xe-cores) (Core Ultra 5 225) and Radeon 8050S (Ryzen AI Max PRO 385) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core Ultra 5 225 targets Mainstream Desktop / Efficiency, Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 targets Enterprise AI Mobile. Direct competitor: Core Ultra 5 225 rivals Ryzen 5 8600G; Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 rivals M3 Max.
| Feature | Core Ultra 5 225 | Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | Yes |
| IGPU Model | Intel Arc Graphics (2 Xe-cores) | Radeon 8050S |
| Unlocked | No | Yes |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d, EPT | AMD-V |
| Target Use | Mainstream Desktop / Efficiency | Enterprise AI Mobile |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












