AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 vs Intel Core i5-14490F Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data splits this comparison into two clearly distinct performance profiles. In Cinebench workloads, the Intel Core i5-14490F holds a commanding lead across every single- and multi-threaded test. The Ryzen AI Max 385 trails by 31.9% in Cinebench R23 multi-core, scoring 15,674 against Intel’s 23,000. The same margin appears in Cinebench R15 multi-core (1,579 versus 2,318) and Cinebench R20 multi-core (6,583 versus 9,660), each showing a 31.9% deficit for AMD. Single-core results follow the same pattern, with Intel ahead by 32.1% in Cinebench R15 (327 versus 222), 31.8% in Cinebench R20 (1,363 versus 929), and 31.9% in Cinebench R23 (3,247 versus 2,212).

The Passmark suite inverts the picture almost completely. The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 wins 10 of the 17 head-to-head benchmarks, while Intel takes 7. The largest AMD victory comes in extended instructions, where it scores 33,873 against Intel’s 21,731, a 55.9% advantage. Find prime numbers shows a 35.2% lead for AMD (165 versus 122). Random string sorting favors AMD by 22.8% (43,725 versus 35,608). Integer math delivers a 21.9% edge for AMD (107,046 versus 87,844), and data compression shows a 19.6% lead (406,505 versus 340,026). The AMD chip also wins Passmark multi-thread by 17.6% (33,705 versus 28,662), data encryption by 9.3% (19,926 versus 18,225), floating-point math by 6.8% (71,105 versus 66,558), and single-thread by 4.8% (4,060 versus 3,873).

Intel’s remaining wins in the Passmark suite are narrower. It takes physics with 2,093 against 1,889, a 9.7% margin. The overall average benchmark score confirms the split: AMD reaches 44,309, while Intel sits at 38,149. AMD’s percentile among all CPUs is 88 versus Intel’s 86. The nearest-rival data places the Ryzen AI Max 385 within 0.6% of the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D and 0.4% of the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H, while the Core i5-14490F sits within 0.3% of the Intel Core i5-13600HX. These figures indicate that the two processors occupy adjacent performance tiers overall, but the distribution of wins matters more than the average.

Architecture Differences

The two chips use fundamentally different designs. The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 is a mobile processor built on TSMC’s 4 nm process, with the Zen 5 architecture and the Strix Halo codename. It has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core i5-14490F is a desktop part on Intel’s 10 nm process, using the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-R codename. It has 10 cores and 16 threads, meaning the extra two cores contribute to its Cinebench lead without adding threads.

Cache layouts differ as well. AMD provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3. Intel matches the L1 size at 80 KB per core but provides 1.25 MB of L2 per core and only 24 MB of shared L3. The Intel chip’s larger per-core L2 likely helps its single-threaded Cinebench scores, while AMD’s larger L3 may support its Passmark data-heavy workloads.

Memory support separates the two further. The Ryzen AI Max 385 uses LPDDR5X across a quad-channel bus, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory. The Core i5-14490F accepts both DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, and the database records no memory bandwidth figure for it. ECC is not supported on the Intel part. The AMD chip’s higher memory bandwidth aligns with its Passmark wins in data compression, encryption, and random string sorting, all of which are memory-sensitive.

PCIe connectivity also differs. AMD lists Gen 4 with 16 lanes on the CPU only. Intel lists Gen 5 with 16 lanes on the CPU only. The Intel part has no integrated graphics, while AMD integrates the Radeon 8050S. The AMD chip’s socket is AMD Socket FP11, and the Intel chip uses Intel Socket 1700. The AMD processor’s TDP is 55 watts, while Intel’s is 65 watts. Both have a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, but the base clocks differ substantially: AMD runs at 3.60 GHz, Intel at 2.50 GHz. The AMD part measures 2x 70.6 mm² in die size, while Intel’s die is 215 mm². Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier.

Release timing shows AMD arrived later, with a release date of January 5, 2025, versus December 31, 2023, for Intel. Both remain in active production. The AMD part numbers as 100-000001424, the Intel as SRN35.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear division of use cases. For pure rendering and CPU throughput in Cinebench-style applications, the Intel Core i5-14490F is the stronger processor. Its 10 cores and 16 threads produce multi-core scores that exceed AMD’s by roughly one-third across every Cinebench version. Single-core Cinebench results also favor Intel by about 32%, which indicates a substantial advantage in lightly threaded rendering tasks. The physics test in Passmark adds to Intel’s tally, showing a 9.7% edge there.

For data-processing, cryptography, and integer-heavy workloads, the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 is the better performer. Its Passmark wins cover extended instructions by 55.9%, prime number finding by 35.2%, random string sorting by 22.8%, integer math by 21.9%, and data compression by 19.6%. The AMD chip also wins the Passmark multi-thread score by 17.6% despite losing every Cinebench multi-core test, which indicates that Passmark’s workload mix favors AMD’s memory bandwidth and instruction set features. The single-thread Passmark score also goes to AMD by 4.8%, a narrower margin than the Cinebench single-core gap but still a win.

The overall average benchmark scores place AMD ahead by 16.1%, and its 88th percentile versus Intel’s 86th percentile confirms that position. The nearest-rival comparisons show AMD at 44,309 average against the Core i9-13950HX at 44,342, a 0.1% gap, while Intel’s 38,149 average matches the Core Ultra 5 245T at 38,194, also within 0.1%. Users who prioritize Cinebench rendering should select the Intel part. Users who prioritize Passmark data workloads should select the AMD part. The data does not indicate a universal winner, only a workload-specific one.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 wins 10 of the 17 recorded head-to-head benchmarks, while the Intel Core i5-14490F wins 7.

Q: How large is Intel’s lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: Intel scores 23,000 against AMD’s 15,674, a 31.9% advantage.

Q: What is AMD’s largest single benchmark win?

A: AMD’s largest win is in Passmark extended instructions, where it scores 33,873 versus Intel’s 21,731, a 55.9% margin.

Q: Do both processors have the same boost clock?

A: Yes, both list a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. Their base clocks differ, with AMD at 3.60 GHz and Intel at 2.50 GHz.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-14490F have integrated graphics?

A: No, the database lists integrated graphics as N/A for the Intel part. The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 includes the Radeon 8050S.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: AMD lists 256.0 GB/s over a quad-channel LPDDR5X bus. Intel lists no memory bandwidth figure and uses a dual-channel bus supporting DDR4 and DDR5.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-14490F wins in all Cinebench tests, covering R15, R20, and R23 in both single- and multi-core variants. These results point to rendering pipelines, video encoding, and any workload that scales with CPU core count in the Cinebench model. The physics test in Passmark also favors Intel, with a 9.7% margin, suggesting better performance in simulated physical interactions that follow that benchmark’s methodology.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 wins in ten Passmark subtests. These include data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, find prime numbers, floating-point math, integer math, multi-thread, random string sorting, and single-thread (recorded twice in the database). The breadth of these wins indicates strong performance in archival and compression tools, cryptographic operations, scientific computing with extended instruction sets, and general integer-heavy programming. The Passmark multi-thread win is notable because it contradicts the Cinebench multi-core results, showing that AMD’s memory subsystem and instruction handling provide a different performance profile under Passmark’s load patterns.

For a desktop workstation focused on rendering, the Intel chip’s 10 cores and higher Cinebench scores make it the data-backed choice. For a mobile or compact system handling data processing, encryption, and scientific workloads, the AMD chip’s Passmark dominance and integrated Radeon 8050S graphics make it the stronger option. The average benchmark score favors AMD by 16.1%, but the workload-specific wins define the practical selection criteria.