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

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data splits these two 8-core, 16-thread AMD processors into two distinct profiles. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G takes 4 benchmark wins, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 takes 7. The most lopsided result favors the Max PRO 385: in PassMark find prime numbers, it scores 157 against the 450G's 87, a 44.6% advantage. That is a massive gap for a single test and points to a fundamental difference in how the two chips execute certain workloads.

The 450G counters with its strongest win in single-thread performance. It posts 4309 in PassMark single thread, beating the Max PRO 385's 3995 by 7.9%. That same margin appears in both single-thread entries in the database, confirming a consistent lead. The 450G also wins data compression with 402831 against 379448, a 6.2% edge, and random string sorting with 42663 against 40784, a 4.6% win.

The Max PRO 385 dominates the heavier compute tests. In floating point math, it scores 69580 versus 63683, an 8.5% lead. Integer math shows 105056 against 99732, a 5.1% advantage. Extended instructions favor the Max PRO 385 at 31442 versus 28223, a 10.2% gap. Multithread performance goes to the Max PRO 385 with 32075 against 30422, a 5.2% margin. Physics simulation shows 1711 versus 1440, a 15.8% win for the Max PRO 385. The only near-tie is data encryption: 18978 for the Max PRO 385 against 18937 for the 450G, a razor-thin 0.2% difference.

The overall average benchmark score in the database shows the 450G at 63331 and the Max PRO 385 at 43326. However, that average is skewed by the different test suites recorded for each chip. The 450G sits at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Max PRO 385 sits at the 88th percentile. The nearest rival data places the 450G among desktop-class parts: it trails the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 by 0.7% and leads the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX by 0.2%, the Intel Core i7-13790F by 0.4%, and the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 by 0.8%. The Max PRO 385 sits near the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465, trailing it by 0.2%, and leads the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H by 0.3%, while trailing the AMD Ryzen 7 170 by 0.8% and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 7745 by 0.9%.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins single-thread benchmarks?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G wins PassMark single thread with 4309 points against 3995 for the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385, a 7.9% margin.

Q: Which processor has the larger multithread score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 records 32075 in PassMark multithread, beating the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G's 30422 by 5.2%.

Q: How large is the gap in prime number finding?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 scores 157 in PassMark find prime numbers, while the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G scores 87. The Max PRO 385 leads by 44.6%, the largest delta in the head-to-head data.

Q: Is there any benchmark where the two are nearly identical?

A: PassMark data encryption shows 18978 for the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 and 18937 for the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G, a difference of only 0.2%.

Q: Which chip has the higher overall percentile ranking?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G ranks in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 ranks in the 88th percentile.

Q: How does each chip compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G trails the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 by 0.7% and leads the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX by 0.2%. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 trails the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465 by 0.2% and leads the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H by 0.3%.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G is the choice for single-threaded responsiveness and data compression tasks. Its 7.9% single-thread lead over the Max PRO 385 means applications that rely on one or two cores will feel snappier. The 6.2% win in data compression and the 4.6% win in random string sorting suggest the 450G handles text processing, file compression, and sorting workloads with greater efficiency. This profile fits desktop productivity scenarios where quick, bursty operations matter more than sustained parallel throughput.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is the stronger all-around compute part. It wins the multithread test by 5.2%, but the margin varies heavily by workload type. The 44.6% lead in prime number finding indicates a major advantage in integer-heavy, branch-intensive loops. The 15.8% win in physics simulation and the 10.2% win in extended instructions further reinforce this. The Max PRO 385 also leads in floating point math by 8.5% and integer math by 5.1%, making it better suited to scientific calculations, simulation, and code that uses advanced instruction sets. The data encryption result is effectively a tie, so neither chip offers a meaningful edge in cryptographic work.

For users balancing both types of loads, the choice depends on which workload dominates. The 450G's higher percentile ranking (93rd versus 88th) reflects its desktop positioning and strong single-core behavior. The Max PRO 385's seven benchmark wins show a broader compute advantage, particularly in tasks that scale across all 16 threads.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several fundamental specifications. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 has a higher base clock of 3.60 GHz but a lower boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The 450G's higher boost ceiling explains its single-thread win, while the Max PRO 385's higher base clock suggests sustained all-core operation at a higher floor.

Thermal design power differs: the 450G is rated at 65 W, the Max PRO 385 at 55 W. The 450G uses AMD Socket AM5, a desktop socket, while the Max PRO 385 uses AMD Socket FP11, a mobile socket. The 450G supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory over a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Max PRO 385 supports only LPDDR5X over a quad-channel bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, a nearly threefold increase in memory throughput. Both support ECC memory.

PCIe lane counts differ. The 450G provides Gen 4 with 12 CPU lanes; the Max PRO 385 provides Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes. The integrated graphics differ as well: the 450G carries a Radeon 860M, while the Max PRO 385 carries a Radeon 8050S. The 450G has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking; the Max PRO 385 does not. The 450G belongs to the desktop market segment, the Max PRO 385 to mobile. The 450G was released later, with a production status of Active for both.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G uses the Gorgon Point codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI 400 generation built on a mix of Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 uses the Strix Halo codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI Max PRO generation built entirely on Zen 5 cores. Both are manufactured on a 4 nm TSMC process, but the underlying core arrangement differs.

Cache configurations show a clear divergence. Both chips have 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 cache per core. The L3 cache, however, is much larger on the Max PRO 385: 32 MB shared versus 8 MB on the 450G. That 4x difference in L3 capacity likely contributes to the Max PRO 385's strong showing in cache-sensitive workloads like prime number finding and extended instructions.

The die size is recorded for the 450G at 195 mm², while no die size is listed for the Max PRO 385. The 450G's dual-core architecture (Zen 5 and Zen 5c) suggests a heterogeneous design, while the Max PRO 385 uses a homogeneous Zen 5 layout. The Max PRO 385's quad-channel memory controller and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth indicate a design focused on memory-intensive and integrated graphics workloads, whereas the 450G's dual-channel 89.6 GB/s configuration is more conventional for a desktop part.

The difference in release timing and socket type further separates the two. The 450G targets desktop AM5 platforms with an unlocked multiplier and a 65 W TDP. The Max PRO 385 targets mobile FP11 platforms with a locked multiplier and a 55 W TDP. Despite the lower TDP, the Max PRO 385 delivers higher multithread and math performance in the recorded benchmarks, a result that aligns with its larger L3 cache and higher base clock. The 450G compensates with a higher boost clock and superior single-thread scores, making the architectural tradeoff clear: the Max PRO 385 favors sustained parallel throughput and memory bandwidth, while the 450G favors peak single-core speed and desktop flexibility.