AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 vs Intel Core 3 N355 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 and Intel Core 3 N355 occupy opposite ends of the mobile performance spectrum. The data shows a decisive, across-the-board victory for the AMD part, which wins all 15 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The Intel Core 3 N355, while efficient, delivers a fraction of the performance in every recorded test, making the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 the clear choice for demanding workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic gaps appear in multi-threaded and extended instruction workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores 18759 points against the Intel Core 3 N355's 5262 points, a difference of 256.5%. The older Cinebench R15 multi-core test shows a similar story, with the AMD part scoring 2872 versus 822, a 249.4% advantage. These results indicate that the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 delivers roughly 3.5 times the multi-core rendering throughput of the N355.

Single-core performance also favors AMD substantially, though the margin is smaller. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 records 1960 points in Cinebench R23 single-core, 88.6% ahead of the N355's 1039. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the AMD chip scores 298 against 168, a 77.4% lead. PassMark's single-thread test confirms the pattern: 4185 for AMD versus 2153 for Intel, a 94.4% difference. The AMD architecture provides nearly double the single-threaded throughput.

The largest percentage win for the AMD part appears in PassMark extended instructions, where it scores 32719 versus 5968, a 448.2% lead. This suggests a massive advantage in workloads using advanced CPU instruction sets, such as AVX-512 or similar. PassMark find prime numbers shows a 437% gap (145 vs 27), and data compression shows a 241.4% difference (400887 vs 117435). Integer math (109588 vs 33894, 223.3% lead) and floating-point math (72722 vs 22695, 220.4% lead) both favor AMD by more than a factor of three.

Memory-sensitive and multitasking benchmarks reinforce the trend. PassMark multi-thread scores 33486 for AMD versus 10174 for Intel, a 229.1% difference. Physics simulation shows 1843 versus 625, a 194.9% lead, and random string sorting records 43196 versus 14706, a 193.7% gap. Data encryption completes the sweep, with AMD's 20092 beating Intel's 8121 by 147.4%. Across all 15 recorded comparisons, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 wins every single test with no exceptions.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 wins in every measured category, but the magnitude of the win varies by workload type. The most extreme advantages appear in extended instructions and prime number finding, where the AMD part is over four times faster. These are compute-heavy, high-throughput tasks that benefit from the Zen 5 architecture's wider execution resources and higher clock speeds. Rendering workloads, represented by Cinebench tests, also heavily favor AMD, with multi-core scores roughly 2.5 to 3.5 times higher.

The Intel Core 3 N355 shows its closest relative performance in single-threaded tests, where the gap narrows to approximately 77% to 94%. While still a decisive loss, this indicates that basic everyday responsiveness, such as light web browsing or document editing, suffers less of a penalty compared to heavy multi-threaded tasks. The N355's strongest performance relative to the AMD part is in data encryption, where it trails by 147.4%, the smallest percentage deficit in the entire benchmark suite.

For general productivity, the Ryzen AI Max+ 388's multi-thread score of 33486 in PassMark suggests it can handle simultaneous compilation, rendering, and analysis tasks without significant slowdown. The N355's 10174 multi-thread score places it in a much lower performance tier, suitable only for light, sequential workloads. The data shows no scenario where the Intel part outperforms the AMD part, but the N355's lower power envelope, with a TDP of 15 watts versus 55 watts, makes it more suitable for passively cooled or ultra-portable designs where sustained performance is secondary.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different foundations. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, while the Intel Core 3 N355 uses the Twin Lake architecture (part of the Alder Lake-N generation) on Intel's 10 nm process. The AMD part features 8 cores and 16 threads, leveraging simultaneous multi-threading. The Intel part also has 8 cores but only 8 threads, lacking SMT. Clock speeds differ substantially: the AMD chip boosts to 5.00 GHz from a 3.60 GHz base, whereas the Intel chip boosts to 3.90 GHz from a 1.90 GHz base.

Cache configurations are also notably different. The AMD processor provides 80 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core, plus 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel processor offers 96 KB of L1 per core but only 2 MB of shared L2 and 6 MB of shared L3. The AMD part's much larger L3 cache (32 MB versus 6 MB) helps explain its superior performance in data-heavy workloads like compression and random string sorting. Memory support reinforces the gap: the AMD chip uses quad-channel LPDDR5X with 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Intel chip uses single-channel DDR4, DDR5, or LPDDR5 with 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth. This 6.7x bandwidth difference directly impacts multi-threaded and memory-intensive benchmarks.

Other architectural distinctions include PCIe support: the AMD part offers Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes, while the Intel part provides Gen 3 with 9 lanes. The integrated graphics differ as well, with the AMD Radeon 8060S versus Intel's UHD Graphics 770. The AMD chip supports ECC memory, while the Intel chip does not. The AMD processor uses AMD Socket FP11, while the Intel processor uses Intel BGA 1264. The die size for the AMD part is listed as 2x 70.6 mm², while no die size is recorded for the Intel part. Both processors are locked (multiplier not unlocked) and target the mobile market segment.

The Verdict

The benchmark data leads to a unambiguous conclusion: the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is in a completely different performance class than the Intel Core 3 N355. With an average benchmark score of 49796 versus 13492, the AMD part sits at the 90th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel part sits at the 68th percentile. The AMD chip's nearest rivals include the Intel Core 9 273PE (0.1% slower), Intel Core i5-14600KF (0.8% slower), and AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (1.2% slower), placing it in desktop-class territory. The Intel N355's nearest rivals are the Intel Core i3-12100F (identical score), Intel Core i5-9500 (0.3% faster), and Intel Core 5 120UL (0.8% faster), all of which are significantly lower-performing parts.

For users running multi-threaded applications such as video rendering, 3D modeling, or software compilation, the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 delivers over 250% more performance in Cinebench multi-core tests. For users prioritizing single-thread responsiveness, the AMD part still leads by roughly 90%. The Intel N355's only advantage is its lower power draw, with a TDP of 15 watts versus 55 watts, which may suit fanless or battery-optimized designs. However, from a pure performance perspective, the data shows no reason to choose the Intel part unless power constraints are absolute.

The Ryzen AI Max+ 388's larger cache, higher memory bandwidth, and SMT support make it the only viable option for demanding professional workloads. The N355, with its 6 MB L3 cache and single-channel memory, is better suited for basic tasks like web browsing, office applications, or light media playback. The recorded benchmarks show the AMD part winning every single comparison, making the verdict straightforward: the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is the superior processor in all measured performance aspects.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores 1960 points, which is 88.6% higher than the Intel Core 3 N355's 1039 points.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap in Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores 18759 points versus 5262 for the Intel Core 3 N355, a 256.5% difference in favor of AMD.

Q: What are the TDP values for these two CPUs?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has a TDP of 55 watts, while the Intel Core 3 N355 has a TDP of 15 watts.

Q: Do both processors support simultaneous multi-threading?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has 16 threads from 8 cores, while the Intel Core 3 N355 has 8 threads from 8 cores, meaning no SMT on the Intel part.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 supports quad-channel LPDDR5X with 256.0 GB/s, while the Intel Core 3 N355 uses single-channel memory with 38.4 GB/s. The AMD part offers 6.7 times the bandwidth.

Q: Which CPU has a higher PassMark single-thread score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores 4185, which is 94.4% higher than the Intel Core 3 N355's 2153.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 | Intel Core 3 N355 |

|---|---|---|

| Cores / Threads | 8 / 16 | 8 / 8 |

| Base Clock | 3.60 GHz | 1.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 3.90 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP11 | Intel BGA 1264 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Twin Lake |

| Process Node | 4 nm (TSMC) | 10 nm (Intel) |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 96 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (shared) |

| L3 Cache | 32 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5, LPDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Quad-channel | Single-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 38.4 GB/s |

| ECC Support | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 Lanes | Gen 3, 9 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 8060S | UHD Graphics 770 |

| Production Status | Active | Active |

| Release Date | 2026-01-05 | 2025-01-06 |