AMD Ryzen AI 7 450 vs AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data records a clean sweep: the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 wins all 15 compared benchmarks, with zero wins for the Ryzen AI 7 450. The margins are not uniform, however, and the pattern of deltas reveals where the larger chip truly separates itself.

The most dramatic gaps appear in Cinebench single-core testing. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 scores 4012 against 2038 for the Ryzen AI 7 450, a 49.2% advantage. The R15 single-core result tells a similar story: 404 versus 215, a 46.8% delta. These are the largest percentage differences in the entire comparison, and they indicate that the Max PRO 385 holds a commanding lead in lightly threaded workloads.

Multi-threaded Cinebench results also favor the Max PRO 385, though by a smaller margin. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Max PRO 385 scores 28424 against 18316, a 35.6% advantage. The R15 multi-core result narrows considerably: 2865 versus 2713, only a 5.3% delta. This suggests that in certain older rendering workloads, the two chips are far closer than the newer benchmark implies.

PassMark results cluster in a narrower band. The smallest edge is in single-thread performance, where the Max PRO 385 scores 3995 against 3901, a 2.4% delta. Data compression shows a 16.7% lead (379448 versus 315906), while integer math sits at 15.7% (105056 versus 88531). Floating-point math favors the Max PRO 385 by 21.7% (69580 versus 54447). Extended instructions show a 28.8% gap (31442 versus 22400), and prime number finding shows a 43.3% delta (157 versus 89).

The average benchmark score for the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is 43326, placing it at the 88th percentile among all CPUs. The Ryzen AI 7 450 averages 39485, at the 87th percentile. The nearest rivals for the Max PRO 385 include the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465 at 43431 (0.2% ahead) and the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H at 43210 (0.3% behind). The Ryzen AI 7 450 sits near the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS at 39603 (0.3% behind) and the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D at 39768 (0.7% ahead).

Architecture Differences

Both processors use the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process node, but the platform designs diverge substantially. The Ryzen AI 7 450 carries the codename Gorgon Point and belongs to the Ryzen AI 400 generation, which combines Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. The Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 uses the Strix Halo codename from the Ryzen AI Max PRO generation, with exclusively Zen 5 cores.

Both chips have 8 cores and 16 threads, and both allocate 80 KB of L1 cache per core with 1 MB of L2 per core. The L3 cache tells a different story: the Ryzen AI 7 450 has 8 MB total, while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 has 32 MB shared. That 4x difference in L3 capacity likely explains part of the performance gap in cache-sensitive workloads.

Memory support also differs significantly. The Ryzen AI 7 450 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus, delivering 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 supports only LPDDR5X but over a quad-channel bus, reaching 256.0 GB/s. That is roughly 2.85x the memory bandwidth, a factor that directly impacts integrated graphics performance and memory-heavy tasks.

The sockets differ: the Ryzen AI 7 450 uses AMD Socket FP8, while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 uses AMD Socket FP11. Both support PCIe Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes. The integrated graphics units are different as well: the Ryzen AI 7 450 pairs with the Radeon 860M, while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 uses the Radeon 8050S. The Max PRO 385 also has a higher base clock at 3.60 GHz versus 2.00 GHz, though its boost clock is slightly lower at 5.00 GHz versus 5.10 GHz.

The thermal design power reflects the platform gap: the Ryzen AI 7 450 is rated at 28 W, while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is rated at 55 W. That higher power envelope enables the Max PRO 385 to sustain higher clocks and feed its larger cache and wider memory bus.

Both chips support ECC memory, both are unlocked for multipliers, and both are listed as active production parts. The release dates differ by roughly a year, with the Max PRO 385 dated January 2025 and the Ryzen AI 7 450 dated January 2026.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen AI 7 450 does not win any recorded benchmark, so the use-case split comes down to relative margins rather than outright victories. The data suggests the Ryzen AI 7 450 is best suited for workloads where the gap is smallest, namely single-threaded PassMark tasks where it trails by only 2.4%. In practical terms, this chip remains competitive for everyday responsiveness and lightly threaded applications where the larger chip's extra cache and bandwidth do not come into play.

The Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 dominates across the board, but the magnitude of its wins varies by workload type. Its largest advantages appear in Cinebench single-core tests (46.8% to 49.2%), which points to strong per-core performance driven by the higher 3.60 GHz base clock and the full Zen 5 core design. The 43.3% lead in prime number finding reinforces this interpretation, as that workload relies heavily on single-thread throughput and integer arithmetic.

For multi-threaded rendering, the Max PRO 385 leads by 35.6% in Cinebench R23 multi-core, though the R15 multi-core margin shrinks to just 5.3%. This indicates that the larger chip scales better under sustained multi-core load, but older benchmarks may not fully capture the architectural advantages.

Memory-intensive workloads favor the Max PRO 385 due to its quad-channel LPDDR5X setup with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 21.7% lead in floating-point math and the 16.7% lead in data compression both align with this memory advantage. The 28.8% lead in extended instructions suggests the Max PRO 385 handles SIMD-heavy code more efficiently, likely aided by its larger L3 cache.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher single-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 scores 4012 in Cinebench R23 single-core, which is 49.2% higher than the Ryzen AI 7 450's 2038.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each processor support?

A: The Ryzen AI 7 450 supports 89.6 GB/s over a dual-channel bus, while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 supports 256.0 GB/s over a quad-channel bus.

Q: Do both CPUs have the same core and thread counts?

A: Yes, both have 8 cores and 16 threads. They also share the same L1 and L2 cache allocations per core.

Q: What is the L3 cache difference between the two?

A: The Ryzen AI 7 450 has 8 MB of L3 cache, while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 has 32 MB shared.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Ryzen AI 7 450 boosts to 5.10 GHz, which is 0.10 GHz higher than the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385's 5.00 GHz boost clock.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each chip?

A: The Ryzen AI 7 450 is rated at 28 W, while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is rated at 55 W.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a one-sided comparison. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 wins every recorded test, with an average benchmark score of 43326 versus 39485 for the Ryzen AI 7 450. The percentile rankings are close (88th versus 87th), but the actual score gap is roughly 9.7%.

The Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 should be the choice for workloads that demand maximum multi-core throughput, high memory bandwidth, or strong single-core performance. Its 35.6% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 49.2% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core make it the clear pick for rendering, simulation, and productivity tasks. The 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 32 MB L3 cache further support memory-intensive applications.

The Ryzen AI 7 450 remains viable for scenarios where power consumption matters. Its 28 W TDP is less than half of the Max PRO 385's 55 W rating, and its 2.4% single-thread PassMark deficit means everyday tasks will feel nearly identical. For users who prioritize battery life and portability over peak performance, the Ryzen AI 7 450 offers a closer match to the Max PRO 385 in light workloads than the headline numbers suggest.

The architecture differences point to distinct design goals. The Ryzen AI 7 450 uses a hybrid Zen 5 / Zen 5c configuration in a compact FP8 socket with dual-channel memory, optimized for efficiency. The Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 uses full Zen 5 cores in an FP11 socket with quad-channel memory and a much larger cache, optimized for performance. The data confirms that these design choices translate directly into measurable benchmark advantages for the larger chip.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI 7 450 | AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 |

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

| Base Clock | 2.00 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.10 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 55 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | AMD Socket FP11 |

| Codename | Gorgon Point | Strix Halo |

| Generation | Ryzen AI 400 (Zen 5 / Zen 5c) | Ryzen AI Max PRO (Zen 5) |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB | 32 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | LPDDR5X |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 256.0 GB/s |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 860M | Radeon 8050S |

| Release Date | January 2026 | January 2025 |

| Part Number | 100-000001868 | 100-000001422 |