AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 vs Intel Core 3 201E Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep in favor of the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385, which wins all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the Intel Core 3 201E. The largest margin appears in PassMark extended instructions, where the AMD part scores 33,873 against Intel's 11,035, a 207% advantage. That workload category, which typically exercises SIMD and specialized instruction paths, highlights the architectural gulf between the two processors.

Multi-core Cinebench results tell a consistent story. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ryzen AI Max 385 posts 15,674 versus 12,613 for the Core 3 201E, a 24.3% lead. The same delta repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core (6,583 vs. 5,297, also 24.3%) and Cinebench R15 multi-core (1,579 vs. 1,271, 24.2%). Single-core Cinebench margins are nearly identical: R23 single-core shows 2,212 against 1,780 (24.3%), R20 single-core shows 929 against 747 (24.4%), and R15 single-core shows 222 against 179 (24.0%). This uniformity across Cinebench versions suggests the advantage is not workload-specific but reflects a fundamental per-thread and per-core performance gap.

The PassMark suite reveals even larger separations in throughput-oriented tests. Integer math scores 107,046 for AMD versus 43,894 for Intel, a 143.9% difference. Floating-point math shows 71,105 against 33,260, a 113.8% margin. Data compression delivers 406,505 versus 164,160, a 147.6% lead. Random string sorting lands at 43,725 versus 17,783, a 145.9% gap. The multithread PassMark score is 33,705 versus 14,839, a 127.1% advantage. Physics simulation shows 1,889 against 1,141, a 65.6% edge.

Encryption and prime-number workloads also favor AMD heavily. Data encryption scores 19,926 versus 8,931, a 123.1% difference. Finding prime numbers yields 165 versus 57, a 189.5% margin. The smallest head-to-head delta is in PassMark single-thread, where AMD scores 4,060 versus Intel's 3,482, a 16.6% lead. Even that narrower margin remains substantial for a single-threaded workload.

Average benchmark scores place the Ryzen AI Max 385 at 44,309, which ranks in the 88th percentile among all CPUs in the database. The Core 3 201E averages 19,056, landing in the 73rd percentile. The nearest rivals to the AMD chip include the Intel Core i9-13950HX (average score 44,342, only 0.1% higher), the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H (44,466, 0.4% higher), and the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D (44,573, 0.6% higher). The Intel Core 3 201E's closest competitors are the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS (19,047, essentially tied), the Intel Core i5-12400F (19,039, 0.1% lower), and the Intel Core i5-1335U (18,982, 0.4% lower).

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 wins across every measured category, so the use-case split is defined by the magnitude of its advantage rather than the direction. Single-threaded tasks see the smallest gap: PassMark single-thread shows a 16.6% lead, and Cinebench single-core tests show roughly 24%. This means lightly threaded applications, such as older games or basic office productivity, still favor AMD, but the margin is more modest.

Multi-threaded and vectorized workloads show the largest separation. The 207% advantage in extended instructions and the 189.5% lead in prime-number finding indicate that AMD's architecture handles complex instruction streams and mathematical workloads far more efficiently. Data compression, integer math, and floating-point math all show margins above 113%, which points to strong performance in content creation, scientific computing, and data processing tasks. The 127.1% multithread PassMark lead and the 65.6% physics advantage reinforce that heavily parallel workloads benefit most from the Ryzen AI Max 385.

For the Intel Core 3 201E, there are no benchmark wins to claim. Its closest performance parity relative to AMD appears in single-threaded PassMark, where the 16.6% deficit is the smallest across the entire comparison. The Core 3 201E does hold a 73rd percentile ranking, meaning it outperforms a majority of CPUs in the database, but against the Ryzen AI Max 385 it trails in every recorded test.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, codenamed Strix Halo. It integrates 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel Core 3 201E, codenamed Bartlett Lake, uses a 10 nm Intel process and provides 4 cores and 8 threads, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The core count difference (8 versus 4) and thread count difference (16 versus 8) directly explain much of the multi-threaded performance gap.

Cache hierarchies differ meaningfully. The AMD chip carries 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3. The Intel chip also has 80 KB of L1 per core, but its L2 is larger at 1.25 MB per core, while its shared L3 is only 12 MB. The AMD processor's 32 MB L3 gives it a substantial capacity advantage for cached workloads, while Intel's larger per-core L2 may help in some latency-sensitive scenarios.

Memory support diverges sharply. The Ryzen AI Max 385 uses LPDDR5X memory over a quad-channel bus, yielding 256.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The Core 3 201E supports both DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, with 76.8 GB/s of bandwidth. That 179.2 GB/s difference is a major factor in the data-heavy benchmark results, particularly compression, sorting, and encryption. Both processors support ECC memory.

The platform targets also differ. The AMD chip fits an AMD Socket FP11 and is classified as a mobile processor, while the Intel chip uses Intel Socket 1700 and is a desktop part. The AMD chip has a 55 W TDP, while the Intel chip is rated at 60 W. PCIe support favors Intel, which provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while AMD offers Gen 4 with 16 lanes. Integrated graphics also differ: AMD uses a Radeon 8050S, while Intel uses UHD Graphics 730.

Die sizes and production details are recorded. The AMD chip uses a 2x 70.6 mm² die configuration, while the Intel chip has a single 163 mm² die. Both are listed as active production parts, with the Ryzen AI Max 385 released on January 5, 2025, and the Core 3 201E released on January 12, 2025. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $134. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The AMD part number is 100-000001424, and the Intel part number is SRVTR.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 boosts to 5.00 GHz, while the Intel Core 3 201E boosts to 4.80 GHz. Both have the same 3.60 GHz base clock.

Q: How much larger is the AMD chip's L3 cache?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 has 32 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core 3 201E has 12 MB of shared L3, a 20 MB difference.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 delivers 256.0 GB/s over a quad-channel LPDDR5X bus. The Intel Core 3 201E provides 76.8 GB/s over a dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 bus.

Q: Does the Intel Core 3 201E beat the AMD chip in any recorded benchmark?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 wins all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with no wins recorded for the Intel Core 3 201E.

Q: How do the two processors rank among all CPUs?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 sits in the 88th percentile with an average benchmark score of 44,309. The Intel Core 3 201E sits in the 73rd percentile with an average score of 19,056.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core 3 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads.

The Verdict

The benchmark data gives a clear outcome: the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 outperforms the Intel Core 3 201E in every recorded test, with margins ranging from 16.6% in single-threaded PassMark to 207% in extended instructions. The AMD chip's 8-core, 16-thread configuration, 32 MB L3 cache, and 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth combine to produce an average score of 44,309, placing it in the 88th percentile. The Intel Core 3 201E, with 4 cores, 8 threads, 12 MB L3, and 76.8 GB/s bandwidth, averages 19,056 and ranks in the 73rd percentile.

The Intel chip's nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS, Intel Core i5-12400F, and Intel Core i5-1335U, all within 0.4% of its average score. The AMD chip competes with the Intel Core i9-13950HX, Intel Core Ultra X9 388H, and AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D, all within 0.6% of its average. Those groupings show that the Ryzen AI Max 385 sits in a much higher performance tier, despite the Intel part carrying a 60 W TDP versus AMD's 55 W.

For users prioritizing raw throughput in multi-threaded, memory-intensive, or vectorized workloads, the data points exclusively to the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385. For users constrained to a desktop platform with Intel Socket 1700, the Core 3 201E still delivers a 73rd percentile ranking, but it cannot match the AMD chip in any measured category. The recorded results leave no ambiguity: the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 is the stronger processor across the board, and the Intel Core 3 201E's only advantages are platform-specific, such as PCIe Gen 5 support and a larger per-core L2 cache, neither of which translates into a benchmark win.