AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 vs Intel Core i9-14901KE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive performance advantage for the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 in the available Cinebench and PassMark test suites. The Intel Core i9-14901KE has no benchmark scores in the database, leaving the AMD part without a direct rival measurement in these specific tests. The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 achieves an average benchmark score of 44309, placing it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Core i9-13950HX with an average score of 44342 (a delta of -0.1%), the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H with 44466 (a delta of -0.4%), and the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D with 44573 (a delta of -0.6%). The Intel Core i9-14901KE, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 0 and sits in the 50th percentile, with no nearest rivals listed.

Looking at the specific scores, the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 delivers 1579 points in Cinebench R15 multi-core and 222 in single-core. In Cinebench R20, it records 6583 multi-core and 929 single-core. The Cinebench R23 results show 15674 multi-core and 2212 single-core. These figures indicate a strong multi-threaded showing from an 8-core, 16-thread design. The PassMark suite reinforces this, with a multithread score of 33705, a single-thread score of 4060, integer math at 107046, floating point math at 71105, and extended instructions at 33873. Data compression reaches 406505, data encryption hits 19926, physics scores 1889, and random string sorting records 43725. Find prime numbers registers 165.

The Intel Core i9-14901KE lacks any recorded benchmark entries, so a direct numeric comparison in these workloads is not possible from the database. The contrast in available data is stark: the AMD part has 17 benchmark results across two major suites, while the Intel part has zero. This absence of data means the head-to-head comparison necessarily relies on the AMD part's measured results and its percentile standing relative to the broader CPU population.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385's 88th percentile ranking indicates that it outperforms the vast majority of CPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals are all within a narrow 0.6% band, suggesting that the AMD part sits at the edge of a tightly clustered group of high-performance processors. The Intel Core i9-14901KE's 50th percentile ranking, while based on no recorded benchmark results, positions it at the median of the database population, which is a far lower standing than the AMD part.

The Verdict

The data favors the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 for any workload captured by Cinebench or PassMark tests. Its measured results place it in the 88th percentile, with an average score of 44309, and its nearest rivals are all within a fraction of a percent of its average. The Intel Core i9-14901KE has no benchmark scores in the database, which means no measured evidence supports its performance in these tests. Its 50th percentile and average score of 0 reflect the absence of data rather than a measured outcome.

For multi-threaded tasks, the AMD part's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 15674 and PassMark multithread score of 33705 indicate strong parallel performance from its 8 cores and 16 threads. For single-threaded tasks, its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2212 and PassMark single-thread score of 4060 show competitive per-thread performance. The Intel part, with no such scores, cannot be assessed on these metrics from the database.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 also carries the advantage of an integrated Radeon 8050S GPU, whereas the Intel Core i9-14901KE uses UHD Graphics 770. For users relying on integrated graphics, the AMD part's discrete-class Radeon solution is likely to deliver superior visual performance, though the database does not include specific graphics benchmark numbers for either part.

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score for the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 has an average benchmark score of 44309, placing it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs in the database.

Q: Does the Intel Core i9-14901KE have any benchmark scores in the database?

A: No. The Intel Core i9-14901KE has an empty benchmarks array, an average benchmark score of 0, and no nearest rivals listed.

Q: How does the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 compare to its nearest rivals in average score?

A: It is 0.1% behind the Intel Core i9-13950HX (44342), 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core i5-13600 (44240), 0.4% behind the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H (44466), and 0.6% behind the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D (44573).

Q: What are the Cinebench R23 scores for the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 records 15674 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2212 in Cinebench R23 single-core.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for both processors?

A: Both the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 and the Intel Core i9-14901KE have 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What is the production status of each processor?

A: Both the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 and the Intel Core i9-14901KE have a production status of Active.

Specification Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 and Intel Core i9-14901KE differ across nearly every hardware specification in the database, beyond the shared core and thread counts of 8 cores and 16 threads.

The AMD part has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, while the Intel part has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz. The Intel part holds the higher clock advantage on both ends.

Thermal design power differs substantially: the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 is rated at 55 W, while the Intel Core i9-14901KE is rated at 125 W.

The sockets are incompatible. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP11, and the Intel part uses Intel Socket 1700.

Memory support diverges: the AMD part supports LPDDR5X with a quad-channel memory bus and a memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. The Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus, and its memory bandwidth is not recorded in the database. Both parts support ECC memory.

PCIe capabilities differ. The AMD part provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only).

Integrated graphics differ: the AMD part uses a Radeon 8050S, and the Intel part uses UHD Graphics 770.

Market segment and release date also differ. The AMD part is a mobile processor released on 2025-01-05, and the Intel part is a desktop processor released on 2024-06-30.

The multiplier is locked on the AMD part and unlocked on the Intel part.

Part numbers are 100-000001424 for the AMD part and Q49DSRNJC for the Intel part.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 uses the Zen 5 architecture under the codename Strix Halo, belonging to the Ryzen AI Max generation. It is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². The Intel Core i9-14901KE uses the Raptor Lake architecture under the codename Raptor Lake-R, belonging to the Core i9 generation (Raptor Lake Refresh). It is fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel, with a die size of 257 mm².

Cache configurations differ. Both parts have 80 KB of L1 cache per core. The AMD part has 1 MB of L2 cache per core and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part has 2 MB of L2 cache per core and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part therefore offers double the L2 cache per core and 4 MB more L3 cache.

The foundry and process node are a notable divergence: TSMC at 4 nm for AMD versus Intel at 10 nm for Intel. The smaller process node gives the AMD part a potential efficiency advantage, although the database does not include direct efficiency measurements.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 wins in every category where the database contains measurement data. Its Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 scores cover both multi-core and single-core workloads, and its PassMark suite spans data compression, encryption, extended instructions, prime number finding, floating point math, integer math, multithread, physics, random string sorting, and single-thread tests. Across all of these, it delivers recorded results that place it in the 88th percentile with an average score of 44309.

The mobile market segment and 55 W TDP of the AMD part make it suited to power-constrained environments, though the database does not include power efficiency benchmarks. Its quad-channel LPDDR5X memory with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth supports memory-intensive workloads. The integrated Radeon 8050S provides a graphics solution for systems without a discrete GPU.

The Intel Core i9-14901KE wins only in specifications, not measured performance. It has higher base and boost clocks at 3.80 GHz and 5.80 GHz, double the L2 cache per core at 2 MB, more L3 cache at 36 MB, PCIe Gen 5 support, and an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. Its desktop segment and 125 W TDP suggest a design aimed at high-power desktop builds, and its dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 support offers memory flexibility. However, the database contains no benchmark results for this part, so its actual performance in any workload cannot be quantified here.

The data supports a clear conclusion: the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 is the measured performer, while the Intel Core i9-14901KE remains unverified in the database.