AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 9945 vs AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-thread score in the database?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 9945 records a single-thread score of 4619, which is 17.6% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392's score of 3927. This is the largest performance gap between the two chips in any benchmark category.

Q: How do the two processors compare in average benchmark score?

A: The Ryzen 9 PRO 9945 has an average benchmark score of 96083, while the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 90541. The PRO 9945 sits 0.3% above the AMD EPYC 4565P in its nearest rival group, whereas the AI Max+ 392 sits 0.2% below the Intel Xeon 654 in its own rival group.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth between the two?

A: The Ryzen 9 PRO 9945 supports dual-channel DDR5 with 89.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth, while the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses quad-channel LPDDR5X with 256.0 GB/s. The AI Max+ 392 has nearly three times the raw memory bandwidth figure.

Q: Which chip wins more head-to-head benchmark comparisons?

A: The Ryzen 9 PRO 9945 wins 10 out of 11 recorded head-to-head tests. The only test the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 wins is extended instructions, where it leads by 2.8% (45666 versus 44374).

Q: Do both processors share the same process node?

A: Yes, both are built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. Both also use the same die size of 2x 70.6 mm². The Ryzen 9 PRO 9945 lists 16,630 million transistors, while the AI Max+ 392 does not have a recorded transistor count in the database.

Q: What are the release dates for these two processors?

A: The Ryzen 9 PRO 9945 was released on 2025-09-15, and the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 was released on 2026-01-05. Both are listed as active production parts.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share fundamental Zen 5 DNA but diverge sharply in platform positioning. The Ryzen 9 PRO 9945 is codenamed Granite Ridge and belongs to the 9000 series, targeting the server and workstation segment on AMD Socket AM5. The Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses the Strix Halo codename, belongs to the Ryzen AI Max generation, and is a mobile part on AMD Socket FP11. Both are 12-core, 24-thread designs with 80 KB L1 cache per core and 1 MB L2 cache per core, but the L3 cache differs in description: the PRO 9945 lists 64 MB, while the AI Max+ 392 lists 64 MB shared.

The process node is identical at 4 nm from TSMC, and both chips use the same dual-die layout of 2x 70.6 mm². The Ryzen 9 PRO 9945 has a recorded transistor count of 16,630 million, while the AI Max+ 392 leaves this field blank in the database. Clock speeds diverge meaningfully: the PRO 9945 runs at 3.40 GHz base and 5.40 GHz boost, while the AI Max+ 392 runs at 3.20 GHz base and 5.00 GHz boost. Power envelopes also differ, with the PRO 9945 rated at 65 W TDP and the AI Max+ 392 at 55 W TDP.

Memory architecture is a major split. The PRO 9945 supports DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The AI Max+ 392 supports LPDDR5X over a quad-channel bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. Both support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity differs as well: the PRO 9945 offers Gen 5 with 24 lanes, while the AI Max+ 392 offers Gen 4 with 16 lanes. Integrated graphics also differ, with the PRO 9945 listing Radeon Graphics and the AI Max+ 392 listing Radeon 8060S. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split based on workload and platform. The AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 9945 is the stronger compute part by a wide margin in most recorded tests. Its average benchmark score of 96083 is 6.1% higher than the AI Max+ 392's 90541. It wins 10 of 11 head-to-head comparisons, including the most important CPU tests: multithread (48664 versus 45231, a 7.6% lead), integer math (171175 versus 152414, a 12.3% lead), and floating point math (107340 versus 99548, a 7.8% lead). For users prioritizing raw CPU throughput, server workloads, or workstation tasks, the PRO 9945 is the choice.

The Ryzen AI Max+ 392 wins only one test: extended instructions, where it scores 45666 versus 44374, a 2.8% lead. Its platform advantages are elsewhere. The quad-channel LPDDR5X memory subsystem with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth dwarfs the PRO 9945's 89.6 GB/s, and its Radeon 8060S integrated graphics suggests a more capable visual solution, though the database records no graphics benchmark for either chip. The AI Max+ 392 also runs at a lower 55 W TDP versus 65 W, making it the more power-efficient option on paper.

The verdict depends on the deployment context. For socketed desktop or server builds where memory bandwidth is secondary to core throughput, the Ryzen 9 PRO 9945 is the clear winner. For mobile or compact systems where the integrated graphics and memory bandwidth matter more than peak CPU scores, the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has a rationale, but the benchmark data shows it lags in nearly every compute metric.

Specification Differences

The Ryzen 9 PRO 9945 and Ryzen AI Max+ 392 differ across nearly every platform-defining specification.

• Base clock: 3.40 GHz (PRO 9945) versus 3.20 GHz (AI Max+ 392)
• Boost clock: 5.40 GHz (PRO 9945) versus 5.00 GHz (AI Max+ 392)
• TDP: 65 W (PRO 9945) versus 55 W (AI Max+ 392)
• Socket: AMD Socket AM5 (PRO 9945) versus AMD Socket FP11 (AI Max+ 392)
• Codename: Granite Ridge (PRO 9945) versus Strix Halo (AI Max+ 392)
• Series/generation: 9000 series, Ryzen 9 (PRO 9945) versus Ryzen AI Max (AI Max+ 392)
• Memory support: DDR5 (PRO 9945) versus LPDDR5X (AI Max+ 392)
• Memory bus: Dual-channel (PRO 9945) versus Quad-channel (AI Max+ 392)
• Memory bandwidth: 89.6 GB/s (PRO 9945) versus 256.0 GB/s (AI Max+ 392)
• PCIe: Gen 5, 24 lanes (PRO 9945) versus Gen 4, 16 lanes (AI Max+ 392)
• Integrated graphics: Radeon Graphics (PRO 9945) versus Radeon 8060S (AI Max+ 392)
• Market segment: Server/Workstation (PRO 9945) versus Mobile (AI Max+ 392)
• Release date: 2025-09-15 (PRO 9945) versus 2026-01-05 (AI Max+ 392)
• Part number: 100-000001407 (PRO 9945) versus 100-000001979 (AI Max+ 392)
• Transistor count: 16,630 million (PRO 9945), not recorded for AI Max+ 392

Shared specifications include 12 cores, 24 threads, 4 nm TSMC process, 2x 70.6 mm² die size, 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, 64 MB L3, ECC support, and a locked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows one-sided dominance, with the Ryzen 9 PRO 9945 winning every test except one. The largest margin comes in single-thread performance, where the PRO 9945 scores 4619 against 3927 for the AI Max+ 392, a 17.6% advantage. This gap appears in both single-thread listings, confirming the result.

Integer math shows the PRO 9945's biggest absolute lead: 171175 versus 152414, a 12.3% difference. Floating point math follows with 107340 versus 99548, a 7.8% lead. Multithread performance favors the PRO 9945 at 48664 versus 45231, a 7.6% margin. Data encryption shows a 9.6% lead for the PRO 9945 (30450 versus 27784). Find prime numbers favors the PRO 9945 by 6.9% (342 versus 320). Random string sorting goes to the PRO 9945 by 5% (62458 versus 59487). Data compression favors the PRO 9945 by 4.5% (579972 versus 554760).

The physics test is the closest result: the PRO 9945 scores 2902 against 2887 for the AI Max+ 392, a margin of just 0.5%. This near-tie suggests that in physics-based workloads, the two chips perform almost identically.

The single win for the AI Max+ 392 comes in extended instructions, where it scores 45666 against 44374, a 2.8% lead. This is the only benchmark category where the AI Max+ 392 demonstrates a computational advantage over the PRO 9945.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 9 PRO 9945 wins in every compute-heavy category recorded in the database. Single-thread performance is its strongest suit, with a 17.6% margin that will benefit lightly threaded applications, responsiveness, and legacy workloads. Integer math and floating point math both show double-digit or near-double-digit leads, making the PRO 9945 the better choice for number-crunching tasks such as financial modeling, scientific simulation, and data processing. Multithread performance at 7.6% ahead indicates solid scaling across all 12 cores and 24 threads.

Data encryption and compression both favor the PRO 9945 by 9.6% and 4.5% respectively, which matters for database workloads, file archiving, and secure communication tasks. The PRO 9945 also leads in prime number finding and random string sorting, further reinforcing its position as the more capable general-purpose compute processor. The near-tie in physics (0.5%) means that for simulation workloads based on physics engines, users can expect comparable performance from either chip.

The Ryzen AI Max+ 392 wins in extended instructions, which covers CPU extensions like AVX and similar instruction set additions. This 2.8% lead suggests that workloads heavily using these extended instruction sets may see a slight edge on the AI Max+ 392, though the margin is modest. The AI Max+ 392's platform advantages also define its use case: the quad-channel LPDDR5X memory bus at 256.0 GB/s provides nearly three times the bandwidth of the PRO 9945, which benefits integrated graphics performance, memory-intensive workloads, and any application that can leverage the larger memory pipe. The Radeon 8060S integrated graphics, while not benchmarked in the database, likely provides a more capable visual solution than the generic Radeon Graphics on the PRO 9945.

The lower 55 W TDP of the AI Max+ 392 also makes it the more thermally restrained option for compact or mobile chassis. The database records the AI Max+ 392 with a 96th percentile ranking among all CPUs, matching the PRO 9945's percentile, so both are elite-tier parts. The choice comes down to whether the user needs peak compute throughput on a socketed platform or integrated graphics and memory bandwidth in a mobile form factor.