AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 vs AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core and thread counts for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 and the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS?

A: Both processors feature 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock speed?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS has a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 boosts to 5.00 GHz.

Q: What are the process nodes for these two AMD processors?

A: Both chips are fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC.

Q: How do the integrated graphics units differ between the two processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 integrates a Radeon 8060S, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS uses a Radeon 780M.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has 32 MB of shared L3 cache, double the 16 MB found on the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two chips?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 supports quad-channel LPDDR5X memory with 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth, whereas the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS uses dual-channel DDR5 with 89.6 GB/s.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 and the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS represent two distinct architectural generations from AMD, despite sharing the same foundry and process node. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is built on the Zen 5 architecture under the Strix Halo codename, while the Ryzen Embedded 8845HS uses the Zen 4 architecture with the Hawk Point codename. Both chips are manufactured by TSMC on a 4 nm process, but the underlying microarchitecture differences are substantial.

The Zen 5 core in the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has a larger L1 cache allocation of 80 KB per core, compared to 64 KB per core in the Zen 4-based Embedded 8845HS. L2 cache is identical at 1 MB per core for both processors. The most significant cache divergence appears at the L3 level: the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 offers 32 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Embedded 8845HS provides only 16 MB. This doubling of L3 capacity directly impacts workloads that rely on frequently accessed shared data.

The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 uses the AMD Socket FP11, whereas the Embedded 8845HS is designed for AMD Socket FP8. This socket difference reflects the platform-level separation between the two product lines, with the Strix Halo part targeting a different mobile form factor than the Hawk Point embedded chip.

Memory architecture also differs substantially. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 supports LPDDR5X memory over a quad-channel interface, yielding a peak memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. The Embedded 8845HS uses DDR5 memory over a dual-channel interface, delivering 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The 166.4 GB/s advantage for the Strix Halo part is among the largest separations between these two chips and has broad implications for integrated graphics performance and memory-sensitive compute tasks.

Both processors support ECC memory and feature PCIe Gen 4 connectivity. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 provides 16 PCIe lanes from the CPU, while the Embedded 8845HS offers 20 lanes. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

The integrated graphics solutions differ by one generation as well. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 pairs with the Radeon 8060S, while the Embedded 8845HS uses the Radeon 780M. These are different GPU implementations, and the memory bandwidth advantage of the Strix Halo platform feeds the graphics subsystem with considerably more data throughput.

The die size and transistor counts also reflect the architectural gap. The Embedded 8845HS has a die size of 178 mm² and contains 25,000 million transistors. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 reports a die size of 2x 70.6 mm², indicating a chiplet-based design. The transistor count for the Strix Halo part is not recorded in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data shows an asymmetric picture between these two processors. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has a full set of benchmark scores across Cinebench and Passmark tests, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. Consequently, the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 holds all wins in head-to-head comparisons by default, though the analysis below relies on the available measurements.

The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 delivers a percentile ranking of 90 against all CPUs, placing it in the top decile of recorded processors. The Embedded 8845HS sits at the 50th percentile, which is the median position. This percentile gap indicates that the Strix Halo chip occupies a performance tier far above the Hawk Point embedded processor, even though both share the same core and thread counts.

In single-threaded workloads, the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 records a Passmark single-thread score of 4185. The architecture's per-core performance benefits from the Zen 5 design and the larger L1 cache. The Embedded 8845HS has no recorded single-thread score, so direct numerical comparison is not possible from the database.

For multi-threaded throughput, the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 posts a Passmark multithread score of 33486 and a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 18759. These numbers place the chip well above the 50th percentile baseline. The Embedded 8845HS has no recorded multi-thread scores, leaving its performance envelope undefined in this dataset.

The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 also shows strength in memory-related benchmarks. Its Passmark data compression score reaches 400887, and random string sorting records 43196. These results reflect the high memory bandwidth of the quad-channel LPDDR5X interface. The Embedded 8845HS, with its dual-channel DDR5 and lower bandwidth, would likely trail in these memory-intensive tests, but no direct measurements exist for confirmation.

Compute-oriented benchmarks further demonstrate the Ryzen AI Max+ 388's capabilities. Integer math scores 109588, floating point math scores 72722, and extended instructions score 32719. Data encryption records 20092, and find prime numbers completes at 145. Physics simulation scores 1843. These numbers indicate a processor that handles both integer and floating point workloads with high throughput.

The Embedded 8845HS targets a different market segment. As an embedded processor, its design priorities may favor reliability, power efficiency, and platform integration over raw benchmark performance. The 45 W TDP versus 55 W TDP for the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 reflects a lower thermal envelope, which is typical for embedded deployments where cooling may be constrained.

Specification Differences

The two processors share several specification categories but diverge in key areas. Both have 8 cores and 16 threads, use TSMC as the foundry, and are built on a 4 nm process. Both support ECC memory and are classified under the mobile market segment. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Clock speeds differ. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Embedded 8845HS has a higher base clock of 3.80 GHz and a higher boost clock of 5.10 GHz. Despite the clock speed advantage for the Hawk Point chip, the Zen 5 architecture of the Strix Halo part delivers superior benchmark results.

Thermal design power differs by 10 W. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is rated at 55 W TDP, while the Embedded 8845HS is rated at 45 W TDP.

Sockets differ: the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 uses AMD Socket FP11, and the Embedded 8845HS uses AMD Socket FP8. These sockets are not interchangeable.

Cache configurations differ at the L1 and L3 levels. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The Embedded 8845HS has 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. L2 cache is identical at 1 MB per core.

Memory support differs. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 uses LPDDR5X with a quad-channel bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Embedded 8845HS uses DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth.

PCIe lanes differ. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 provides 16 lanes of Gen 4 from the CPU, while the Embedded 8845HS provides 20 lanes.

Integrated graphics differ. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has the Radeon 8060S, and the Embedded 8845HS has the Radeon 780M.

Release dates differ. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 was released on 2026-01-05, and the Embedded 8845HS was released on 2024-04-01.

The die size and transistor count are recorded only for the Embedded 8845HS: 178 mm² and 25,000 million transistors. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has a chiplet design reported as 2x 70.6 mm².

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 and the AMD Ryzen Embedded 8845HS. The win counts are zero for both processors in the head-to-head category. However, the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has a complete set of individual benchmark scores, while the Embedded 8845HS has none.

The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 achieves an average benchmark score of 49796 across its recorded tests. Its nearest rivals in the database provide context for this score. The Intel Core 9 273PE averages 49845, which is 0.1% higher than the Ryzen AI Max+ 388. The Intel Core i5-14600KF averages 49394, placing it 0.8% behind. The AMD Ryzen 9 7900 averages 49228, which is 1.2% behind. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G averages 49196, also 1.2% behind.

These rival comparisons show the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 sitting in a competitive band near the top of the database. The chip is essentially tied with the Intel Core 9 273PE, and it edges out several high-performance desktop processors from both Intel and AMD. This positioning at the 90th percentile versus all CPUs confirms that the Strix Halo processor delivers near-flagship performance despite its mobile form factor.

Within its own benchmark suite, the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 shows consistent strength across different test categories. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 18759 and single-core score of 1960 indicate a balanced design that handles both parallel and single-threaded workloads effectively. The Cinebench R15 results follow a similar pattern, with a multicore score of 2872 and a single-core score of 298.

The Passmark suite reveals specific workload characteristics. The data compression score of 400887 is the highest recorded result for this chip, reflecting the benefit of the 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and the large L3 cache. Random string sorting at 43196 also benefits from memory throughput. Integer math at 109588 and floating point math at 72722 show strong arithmetic processing capabilities across both number formats.

The extended instructions score of 32719 indicates that the Zen 5 architecture handles SIMD and specialized instruction sets efficiently. Data encryption at 20092 and physics at 1843 round out the compute profile. The find prime numbers score of 145 is the lowest recorded result, which is typical for this benchmark as it measures a specific algorithmic pattern rather than general performance.

Since the Embedded 8845HS has no benchmark scores, the database cannot provide a numerical comparison between the two chips. The percentile positions tell the story: 90th percentile for the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 versus 50th percentile for the Embedded 8845HS. This gap represents a substantial performance difference, with the Strix Halo part ranking among the top processors in the database while the Hawk Point embedded chip sits at the median.

The absence of benchmark data for the Embedded 8845HS limits quantitative analysis. What can be stated from the recorded specifications is that the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 carries architectural advantages in cache size, memory bandwidth, and integrated graphics. These advantages, combined with its high percentile ranking, position it clearly ahead in the performance hierarchy.