AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 vs Intel Core i7-14700HX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear split between these two mobile processors. The Intel Core i7-14700HX dominates the multi-threaded and encoding-heavy workloads, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 takes narrow victories in single-thread efficiency and specialized instruction execution.

Starting with the Cinebench suite, the Intel part is decisively ahead in multi-core tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, Intel scores 3812 against AMD's 1579, a 58.6% advantage. The gap narrows somewhat in R20 multi-core, where Intel's 13059 beats AMD's 6583 by 49.6%. In R23 multi-core, Intel's 24595 outpaces AMD's 15674 by 36.3%. These are substantial margins that reflect the core count disparity.

Single-core Cinebench results are more nuanced. Intel wins R15 single-core with 296 versus 222, a 25% lead. In R20 single-core, Intel again wins with 1843 against 929, a 49.6% margin. However, in R23 single-core, AMD flips the script: 2212 versus 2103, a 5.2% win for the Ryzen part. This suggests AMD's Zen 5 architecture holds a clock-for-clock efficiency edge in the newest rendering workload.

PassMark results further reinforce Intel's multi-threaded dominance. Intel wins data compression with 438539 against 406505, a 7.3% edge. Data encryption goes to Intel by 23.6% (26092 vs 19926). Floating point math favors Intel heavily: 93836 versus 71105, a 24.2% margin. Integer math sees Intel ahead by 18.5% (131296 vs 107046). The multithread test shows Intel winning 36566 to 33705, a 7.8% gap. Physics simulation goes to Intel by 16.1% (2252 vs 1889), and random string sorting sees Intel ahead by 9.9% (48544 vs 43725).

AMD's PassMark wins are concentrated in specific areas. Extended instructions show AMD ahead by 31.7% (33873 vs 25718), a massive victory that indicates superior SIMD or specialized instruction throughput. Single-thread PassMark results give AMD a modest 2.9% lead (4060 vs 3947). The find prime numbers test is a dead heat at 165 for both, with the tie awarded to AMD.

Overall, the head-to-head tally shows Intel winning 12 of 17 tests, with AMD taking 5. The average benchmark scores reflect this: Intel posts 45953 versus AMD's 44309, a difference of about 3.6%. Intel's nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 7303 (delta 0%) and AMD EPYC 4364P (delta 0%), while AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 sits near the Intel Core i9-13950HX (delta -0.1%) and Intel Core i5-13600 (delta 0.2%).

The Verdict

From the recorded data, the Intel Core i7-14700HX is the stronger all-around performer for multi-threaded workloads. Its 20 cores and 28 threads give it a decisive structural advantage in rendering, physics simulation, and integer-heavy tasks. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 24595 versus 15674 is the clearest signal: for content creation, video encoding, or any parallel compute, Intel is the pick.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 wins in three specific scenarios: newest-generation single-thread rendering (R23 single-core by 5.2%), extended instruction throughput (31.7% ahead), and PassMark single-thread (2.9% ahead). It also matches Intel in prime number calculation. This makes AMD attractive for workloads that leverage advanced instruction sets or where per-thread efficiency in the latest rendering engine matters more than raw core count.

The Intel part also holds the overall percentile edge, sitting at 89th percentile versus AMD's 88th. The average benchmark gap is not enormous, but it is consistent across most tests. Users who prioritize raw throughput should choose Intel. Users who need specialized instruction performance or the latest single-thread rendering efficiency should consider AMD.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. AMD's Ryzen AI Max 385 uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, with a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². Intel's Core i7-14700HX uses Raptor Lake on a 10 nm Intel process, with a die size of 257 mm².

Core configuration differs sharply. AMD offers 8 cores and 16 threads, all presumably based on Zen 5 full-size cores. Intel offers 20 cores and 28 threads, a hybrid layout typical of Raptor Lake-HX with performance and efficiency cores. This structural difference explains the multi-threaded benchmark gaps.

Cache hierarchies show similarities in L1 (80 KB per core for both) but differ in L2 and L3. AMD gives 1 MB L2 per core, Intel gives 2 MB L2 per core. L3 cache is close: AMD has 32 MB shared, Intel has 33 MB shared. The larger per-core L2 on Intel may help with certain workloads.

Process node differences are notable. AMD's 4 nm TSMC process is more advanced than Intel's 10 nm node, which contributes to AMD's efficiency wins in some single-thread tests. The die size disparity (2x 70.6 mm² for AMD versus 257 mm² for Intel) reflects the different manufacturing approaches.

Memory architecture also diverges. AMD supports LPDDR5X with a quad-channel memory bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and no listed bandwidth figure. The memory bandwidth advantage could help AMD in bandwidth-sensitive tasks, though the benchmark data does not isolate this effect.

PCIe generation differs: AMD uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), Intel uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics also differ: AMD has Radeon 8050S, Intel has UHD Graphics 770.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications:

• Cores: AMD has 8, Intel has 20
• Threads: AMD has 16, Intel has 28
• Base clock: AMD at 3.60 GHz, Intel at 2.10 GHz
• Boost clock: AMD at 5.00 GHz, Intel at 5.50 GHz
• TDP: Both at 55 W
• Socket: AMD Socket FP11 versus Intel BGA 1964
• Process node: 4 nm (TSMC) versus 10 nm (Intel)
• L2 cache: 1 MB per core (AMD) versus 2 MB per core (Intel)
• Memory support: LPDDR5X (AMD) versus DDR4, DDR5 (Intel)
• Memory bus: Quad-channel (AMD) versus Dual-channel (Intel)
• PCIe: Gen 4 (AMD) versus Gen 5 (Intel)
• Integrated graphics: Radeon 8050S (AMD) versus UHD Graphics 770 (Intel)
• Multiplier unlocked: No (AMD) versus Yes (Intel)
• Release date: 2025-01-05 (AMD) versus 2024-01-07 (Intel)

The base clock difference is stark: AMD runs at 3.60 GHz base, Intel at 2.10 GHz. Yet Intel's higher boost (5.50 GHz versus 5.00 GHz) and greater core count drive its multi-threaded wins. AMD's higher base clock helps in bursty single-thread tasks.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core rendering?

A: The Intel Core i7-14700HX wins decisively. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, Intel scores 24595 versus AMD's 15674, a 36.3% advantage. The margin is similar in R20 multi-core (49.6%) and R15 multi-core (58.6%).

Q: Does AMD win any single-thread tests?

A: Yes. AMD wins Cinebench R23 single-core by 5.2% (2212 vs 2103) and PassMark single-thread by 2.9% (4060 vs 3947). Intel wins Cinebench R15 and R20 single-core tests.

Q: What is the biggest single benchmark margin for each processor?

A: Intel's largest win is Cinebench R15 multi-core at 58.6% ahead. AMD's largest win is PassMark extended instructions at 31.7% ahead.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: Intel posts an average benchmark score of 45953, which is 3.6% higher than AMD's 44309. Intel sits at the 89th percentile of all CPUs, AMD at the 88th.

Q: Are the processors tied in any test?

A: Yes, PassMark find prime numbers results are identical at 165 for both. The tie is recorded as an AMD win with a delta of 0%.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: Intel has 20 cores and 28 threads. AMD has 8 cores and 16 threads. Intel's core count is 2.5 times higher, which explains its multi-threaded dominance.

Where Each One Wins

Intel Core i7-14700HX wins in:

• All Cinebench multi-core tests (R15, R20, R23), with margins from 36.3% to 58.6%
• Cinebench R15 and R20 single-core tests (25% and 49.6% leads)
• PassMark data compression (7.3% ahead)
• PassMark data encryption (23.6% ahead)
• PassMark floating point math (24.2% ahead)
• PassMark integer math (18.5% ahead)
• PassMark multithread (7.8% ahead)
• PassMark physics (16.1% ahead)
• PassMark random string sorting (9.9% ahead)
• Overall average benchmark score (45953 vs 44309)

AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 wins in:

• Cinebench R23 single-core (5.2% ahead)
• PassMark extended instructions (31.7% ahead)
• PassMark single-thread (2.9% ahead)
• PassMark find prime numbers (tie, recorded as win)
• Base clock frequency (3.60 GHz vs 2.10 GHz)
• Memory bandwidth (256.0 GB/s vs not listed for Intel)

The use-case split is straightforward. Choose Intel for video editing, 3D rendering, physics simulation, and any workload that scales with core count. Choose AMD for the latest single-thread rendering benchmarks, specialized instruction sets (like AVX-512 or similar extended instructions), and scenarios where per-thread efficiency in the newest software matters more than raw thread count. The data does not support AMD for general multi-threaded productivity, where Intel leads in 12 of 17 recorded benchmarks.