AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 vs Intel Core Ultra X7 368H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data splits the two mobile processors across 17 recorded tests, with Intel taking 10 wins and AMD taking 7. The most decisive Intel victories come in the Cinebench suite, where the Core Ultra X7 368H delivers a consistent advantage of roughly 44.5% across all six tests. In Cinebench R23 multicore, Intel scores 28221 against AMD's 15674, a delta of -44.5%. The single-core R23 result follows the same pattern: Intel's 3984 versus AMD's 2212, again a 44.5% gap. The R15 and R20 runs mirror this exactly, with Intel ahead by 44.5% in both multicore and single-core variants.

Beyond Cinebench, Intel extends its lead in PassMark physics, floating point math, prime number finding, and data encryption. The physics test shows Intel at 2857 versus AMD's 1889, a 33.9% advantage. Floating point math delivers 105681 for Intel against 71105 for AMD, a 32.7% gap. The prime number search is the largest single delta in the entire comparison, with Intel scoring 321 versus AMD's 165, a 48.6% lead. Data encryption shows Intel at 25228 versus 19926, a 21% advantage.

AMD's wins are concentrated in data compression, extended instructions, integer math, multithread, random string sorting, and single-thread tests. The largest AMD victory comes in extended instructions, where AMD scores 33873 against Intel's 25669, a 32% lead. Data compression shows AMD at 406505 versus 312927, a 29.9% advantage. Integer math favors AMD by 21.5%, with scores of 107046 against 88083. Random string sorting goes to AMD by 14.8%, with 43725 versus 38093. The multithread test is close, AMD at 33705 versus Intel's 32956, a modest 2.3% edge. The single-thread PassMark test is the tightest of all, AMD at 4060 versus 4005, a 1.4% margin.

The average benchmark score places AMD at 44309 with an 88th percentile ranking versus Intel's 40518 with an 87th percentile ranking. AMD's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-13950HX at 44342 (-0.1%), Intel Core i5-13600 at 44240 (+0.2%), Intel Core Ultra X9 388H at 44466 (-0.4%), and AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D at 44573 (-0.6%). Intel's nearest rivals include Intel Core 7 253PE at 40557 (-0.1%), Intel Core 5 223PE at 40585 (-0.2%), AMD Ryzen 9 7940H at 40431 (+0.2%), and Intel Xeon 6507P at 40426 (+0.2%).

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results indicate a clear division: Intel dominates rendering workloads, physics simulation, floating point operations, and encryption tasks, while AMD excels in compression, integer arithmetic, extended instruction execution, and sorting algorithms.

For Cinebench workloads, which represent typical 3D rendering and CPU stress scenarios, Intel's 16-core design with 16 threads delivers consistently higher scores. The R23 multicore result of 28221 puts Intel roughly 80% ahead of AMD's 15674. This advantage also appears in single-core rendering, where Intel's 3984 R23 score outpaces AMD's 2212 by 80%. The R15 and R20 results show the same proportional lead, indicating a fundamental throughput advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

PassMark physics, which simulates rigid body dynamics, favors Intel by 33.9%. This aligns with the floating point math result, where Intel leads by 32.7%. Encryption workloads also go Intel's way, with a 21% advantage. The prime number search, a heavily integer-dependent task, shows Intel ahead by 48.6%, the largest margin in the entire dataset.

AMD's wins cluster in memory-bandwidth-sensitive and instruction-level tasks. Data compression, which benefits from larger caches and efficient data movement, goes to AMD by 29.9%. The extended instructions test, which exercises SIMD and specialized instruction sets, favors AMD by 32%. Integer math shows AMD ahead by 21.5%. Random string sorting, another memory-heavy workload, gives AMD a 14.8% lead. The PassMark multithread test, which combines various workloads, edges to AMD by 2.3%. The single-thread PassMark test shows AMD ahead by a slim 1.4%, closely matching Intel's single-core Cinebench advantage.

The use-case split is straightforward. Intel wins where raw core count and per-core clock throughput drive performance, particularly in render farms, physics engines, and floating point-heavy scientific code. AMD wins where memory bandwidth, cache efficiency, and instruction-level parallelism matter, such as compression tools, database operations, and integer-heavy application logic.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use fundamentally different design strategies. AMD's Ryzen AI Max 385 uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, with 8 cores and 16 threads. Intel's Core Ultra X7 368H uses the Panther Lake architecture on a 3 nm Intel process, with 16 cores and 16 threads. The core count difference is notable: Intel packs twice the physical cores but does not enable simultaneous multithreading, while AMD uses half the cores with SMT to reach the same thread count.

Cache layouts diverge significantly. AMD allocates 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3. Intel allocates 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and only 18 MB of shared L3. AMD's larger L3 pool, at 32 MB versus 18 MB, helps explain its advantages in compression and sorting workloads, which benefit from caching larger data sets. Intel's larger per-core L1 and L2 allocations support its single-threaded performance, as seen in the Cinebench single-core results.

Memory subsystem differences are substantial. AMD uses quad-channel LPDDR5X with a bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. Intel uses dual-channel LPDDR5X with 153.6 GB/s. AMD's 66.7% higher memory bandwidth directly supports its leads in data compression and random string sorting, both of which are bandwidth-sensitive. AMD also supports ECC memory, while Intel does not.

PCIe connectivity differs by generation and lane count. AMD provides PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes, while Intel provides PCIe Gen 5 with 4 lanes. The integrated graphics solutions also differ: AMD pairs with a Radeon 8050S, Intel with an Arc B390. Both use LPDDR5X memory, and both are mobile-segment parts with active production status.

Power envelopes favor AMD on paper: AMD lists a 55 W TDP versus Intel's 25 W TDP. The release dates are roughly a year apart, with AMD launching on 2025-01-05 and Intel on 2026-01-04. Both use proprietary sockets, AMD Socket FP11 for AMD and Intel BGA 2540 for Intel. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, and neither has a launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 averages 44309 points, while Intel Core Ultra X7 368H averages 40518 points. AMD's nearest rival, the Intel Core i9-13950HX, scores 44342, only 0.1% ahead. Intel's nearest rival, the Intel Core 7 253PE, scores 40557, 0.1% ahead.

Q: Does Intel's higher core count translate to a multithread win?

A: No. Despite having 16 cores versus AMD's 8, Intel loses the PassMark multithread test to AMD by 2.3%, with scores of 32956 versus 33705. Intel wins Cinebench R23 multicore by a wide margin, scoring 28221 against AMD's 15674.

Q: Which processor has better single-thread performance?

A: It depends on the test. In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel wins with 3984 versus AMD's 2212, a 44.5% advantage. In PassMark single-thread, AMD wins with 4060 versus Intel's 4005, a 1.4% margin. The Cinebench result reflects Intel's higher per-core L2 cache and newer process node.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth specifications compare?

A: AMD provides 256.0 GB/s via quad-channel LPDDR5X, while Intel provides 153.6 GB/s via dual-channel LPDDR5X. AMD's bandwidth advantage supports its wins in data compression and random string sorting.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two processors?

A: AMD lists a 55 W TDP, Intel lists a 25 W TDP. The higher AMD TDP aligns with its larger memory bus and integrated Radeon 8050S graphics, while Intel's lower TDP reflects its 16-core, 16-thread design without SMT.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 supports ECC memory. Intel Core Ultra X7 368H does not list ECC support in the database.

The Verdict

The recorded data supports a clear split decision. For rendering-heavy workloads, physics simulation, floating point math, and encryption, the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is the stronger choice. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 28221 against AMD's 15674 represents a 44.5% lead, and the physics test shows a 33.9% advantage. Users running CPU renderers or scientific code with heavy FPU usage should select Intel.

For compression, integer math, extended instructions, and memory-bandwidth-bound tasks, the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 is the better option. Its data compression score of 406505 beats Intel's 312927 by 29.9%, and the extended instructions test shows a 32% lead. AMD's quad-channel memory at 256.0 GB/s, combined with 32 MB of shared L3, gives it a structural advantage in these workloads.

The average benchmark score favors AMD overall, at 44309 versus 40518, and AMD ranks 88th percentile versus Intel's 87th. However, the delta is modest, around 9.4%, and the two processors target different workload profiles. AMD's 7 wins include the multithread PassMark test, while Intel's 10 wins include all six Cinebench tests. The final choice depends on whether the primary workload is rendering and physics (Intel) or compression, sorting, and integer processing (AMD).