AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 vs Intel Core i9-14901E Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive performance advantage for the Intel Core i9-14901E across the majority of tested workloads. Of the 15 head-to-head comparisons in the database, Intel wins 14, with AMD taking a single victory. The most significant margin appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where Intel scores 25753 against AMD's 13794, a delta of -46.4% in favor of Intel. This pattern holds in single-core testing as well, with Intel leading by -46.1% in Cinebench R23 single-core (3635 vs 1958).

Cinebench R15 results follow the same trajectory. Intel leads by -22% in multi-core (2595 vs 2023) and -26% in single-core (366 vs 271). The Passmark suite reinforces this trend. In floating point math, Intel scores 81089 versus AMD's 46996, a -42% gap. Integer math shows a -31.3% difference (112736 vs 77414). The physics test reveals a particularly large disparity: Intel's 3041 against AMD's 1257, a -58.7% delta. Prime number finding shows a -59.8% difference (189 vs 76), the largest relative gap in the dataset.

AMD's sole win comes in Passmark extended instructions, where it scores 18029 versus Intel's 17249, a 4.5% advantage. This indicates the Zen 5 architecture handles certain specialized instruction sets more efficiently. The remaining benchmarks all favor Intel with varying margins: data compression (-11.1%), data encryption (-28.6%), multithread (-27%), random string sorting (-27.5%), and single-thread (-11.3%). The average benchmark score reflects this overall picture: Intel's average is 37911, while AMD's is 32662, a difference that places Intel in the 86th percentile of all CPUs versus AMD's 83rd percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two processors take fundamentally different approaches to design. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, with the Strix Point codename. It belongs to the Ryzen AI PRO 300 generation, which combines Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. The die size is 233 mm². Intel's Core i9-14901E uses Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm Intel process, with the Raptor Lake-R codename, part of the Core 14th Gen family under the Raptor Lake Refresh generation. Its die measures 257 mm².

Both processors have 8 cores and 16 threads, but their cache hierarchies differ. AMD provides 80 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, with only 8 MB of shared L3. Intel matches the 80 KB L1 per core but doubles the L2 to 2 MB per core, and its L3 jumps to 36 MB shared. This larger cache likely contributes to Intel's performance advantage in many benchmarks.

Clock speeds also favor Intel. AMD's base clock is 2.00 GHz with a 5.00 GHz boost, while Intel runs at 2.80 GHz base and 5.60 GHz boost. Thermal design power differs substantially: AMD is rated at 28 W, Intel at 65 W, reflecting their different market segments (mobile versus desktop). Memory support shows AMD using DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a dual-channel bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, while Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus. Both support ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity differs by generation. AMD provides PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while Intel offers PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics also differ: AMD uses the Radeon 880M, Intel uses UHD Graphics 770. The AMD part is built for the AMD Socket FP8, Intel for Socket 1700. Release dates place AMD's launch on 2025-01-05 and Intel's on 2024-06-30, with both listed as Active in production.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i9-14901E boosts to 5.60 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 reaches 5.00 GHz.

Q: How much larger is Intel's L3 cache?

A: Intel has 36 MB of shared L3 cache, compared to AMD's 8 MB, a 4.5x difference in capacity.

Q: What is the TDP rating for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 has a TDP of 28 W, while the Intel Core i9-14901E has a TDP of 65 W.

Q: Which processor wins in Passmark extended instructions?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 scores 18029 versus Intel's 17249, a 4.5% advantage for AMD.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 and the Intel Core i9-14901E list ECC memory support as enabled.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth specifications?

A: AMD lists 89.6 GB/s with DDR5 and LPDDR5X support. Intel does not have a recorded memory bandwidth figure in the database, but supports DDR4 and DDR5.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 | Intel Core i9-14901E |

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

| Base Clock | 2.00 GHz | 2.80 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 5.60 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Raptor Lake |

| Codename | Strix Point | Raptor Lake-R |

| Generation | Ryzen AI PRO 300 (Zen 5 / Zen 5c) | Core i9 (Raptor Lake Refresh) |

| Process Node | 4 nm (TSMC) | 10 nm (Intel) |

| Die Size | 233 mm² | 257 mm² |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB per core | 2 MB per core |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB | 36 MB shared |

| Memory Support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | Not specified |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 880M | UHD Graphics 770 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2025-01-05 | 2024-06-30 |

| Part Number | 100-000001571 | Q49ESRNJH |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-14901E dominates in compute-heavy workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 25753 versus AMD's 13794 indicates strong performance for rendering, video encoding, and other heavily threaded tasks. The physics benchmark (3041 vs 1257) and floating point math (81089 vs 46996) confirm this advantage in scientific and simulation workloads. The integer math result (112736 vs 77414) supports strong performance in general productivity and compilation tasks. The prime number finding score (189 vs 76) suggests an edge in certain algorithmic workloads.

Intel also leads in memory-sensitive operations. The random string sorting test (39138 vs 28390) and data compression (288777 vs 256603) both favor Intel, likely benefiting from the larger 36 MB L3 cache. Single-thread performance follows the same pattern, with Intel ahead by -11.3% in Passmark single-thread (4354 vs 3862).

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 claims one specific win: Passmark extended instructions (18029 vs 17249). This suggests its Zen 5 architecture handles specialized instruction sets more efficiently, which could matter for applications that leverage such extensions. Additionally, AMD's lower 28 W TDP and mobile segment designation indicate suitability for battery-powered systems, though the data does not include direct power efficiency benchmarks.

The Verdict

The benchmark data consistently favors the Intel Core i9-14901E for raw performance. Across almost every measured workload, Intel's scores are higher, often by substantial margins. The Cinebench R23 results show a -46.4% multi-core and -46.1% single-core difference. Passmark physics and prime number tests each approach -60% deltas. For users prioritizing maximum compute throughput, rendering speed, or single-thread responsiveness, the Intel part is the clear choice based on recorded measurements.

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 offers a different profile. Its 28 W TDP, mobile socket, and integrated Radeon 880M position it for portable systems where power draw matters. The single extended instructions win suggests a niche advantage for specific instruction-heavy code. However, the data does not show a workload where AMD leads by a large margin; its only win is a 4.5% edge. The average benchmark score gap (32662 vs 37911) places AMD in the 83rd percentile versus Intel's 86th, confirming that Intel holds a higher overall standing in the database.

The recorded data supports a straightforward conclusion: the Intel Core i9-14901E is the superior performer in nearly every measurable category. The AMD part remains viable for its intended mobile context, but the numbers do not indicate a scenario where it outmatches Intel outside of extended instruction workloads.