AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 vs Intel Core 7 250H Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 records an average benchmark score of 49796, placing it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 7 250H scores 35728 on average, which places it in the 85th percentile.

Q: How do the two compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores 18759 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 13.3% ahead of the Intel Core 7 250H's 16561. This is a significant margin for heavily threaded workloads.

Q: Which chip wins in single-core performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 leads in single-core tests. In Cinebench R23 single-core it scores 1960 versus 1931 for the Intel, a 1.5% advantage. In PassMark single-thread, the AMD scores 4185 against 4148 for the Intel, a 0.9% edge.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two processors?

A: The largest recorded difference is in PassMark extended instructions, where the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores 32719 against 17318 for the Intel Core 7 250H, a difference of 88.9% in favor of the AMD.

Q: Does the Intel Core 7 250H win any benchmark comparisons?

A: Yes, the Intel Core 7 250H wins one head-to-head test: Cinebench R15 multi-core, where it scores 3147 versus 2872 for the AMD, a lead of 8.7%. The Cinebench R15 single-core test is a tie at 298, with the AMD awarded the win based on the recorded data.

Q: What are the memory and platform differences?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 supports LPDDR5X memory with a quad-channel bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, plus ECC memory support. The Intel Core 7 250H supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and no ECC support.

The Verdict

The data shows a clear overall winner in the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388. It secures 14 wins out of 15 head-to-head benchmarks and delivers an average score of 49796, which is 28.1% above the Intel Core 7 250H's 35728 average. The AMD also sits higher in the overall CPU percentile ranking: 90th versus 85th.

The Intel Core 7 250H is the choice only for users whose primary workload resembles the Cinebench R15 multi-core test, where it leads by 8.7%. That single advantage, however, does not carry over to the newer Cinebench R23 multi-core test, where the AMD leads by 13.3%. The Intel's higher boost clock of 5.40 GHz does not translate into a single-core win in either Cinebench R23 or PassMark single-thread tests, as the AMD takes both by narrow margins.

For data compression, encryption, extended instruction sets, prime number finding, floating-point math, integer math, multithreaded PassMark, physics, and random string sorting, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is the better performer. The database indicates the AMD is also the more modern platform with a 4 nm process node versus Intel's 10 nm, plus a newer architecture in Zen 5 versus Raptor Lake. The AMD uses a newer socket (AMD Socket FP11) and offers quad-channel memory with ECC, which the Intel lacks.

The verdict is that the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 delivers superior performance across nearly all recorded metrics, making it the stronger mobile processor for general computing, content creation, and compute-heavy tasks. The Intel Core 7 250H remains a viable option for legacy multi-core benchmarks or workloads specifically optimized for its core configuration.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows one decisive win for the Intel Core 7 250H and a series of substantial victories for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388. The Intel wins Cinebench R15 multi-core with a score of 3147 against 2872, a margin of 8.7%. That result likely reflects the Intel's 14 cores and 20 threads versus the AMD's 8 cores and 16 threads, which helps in this particular legacy test.

The AMD's largest win is in PassMark extended instructions, scoring 32719 versus 17318, an 88.9% advantage. This indicates a major difference in SIMD or specialized instruction throughput. The AMD also dominates PassMark data compression with 400887 versus 303269, a 32.2% lead, and PassMark multithread with 33486 versus 27030, a 23.9% edge. Random string sorting goes to the AMD at 43196 versus 34136, a 26.5% gap.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD scores 18759 against 16561, a 13.3% advantage, which is the more relevant modern multi-threaded test compared to the R15 result. The AMD also wins floating-point math (72722 versus 65094, an 11.7% lead) and integer math (109588 versus 99100, a 10.6% lead). Data encryption shows the AMD at 20092 versus 18206, a 10.4% win.

The single-core results are close but consistently favor the AMD. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the AMD leads 1960 to 1931, a 1.5% margin. PassMark single-thread shows 4185 versus 4148, a 0.9% edge. PassMark physics is nearly identical at 1843 versus 1824, a 1% difference. Prime number finding favors the AMD at 145 versus 106, a 36.8% gap. The R15 single-core test is a tie at 298, with the database recording the AMD as the winner.

Overall, the AMD wins 14 of 15 comparisons, and its victories often come by double-digit percentages. The Intel's single win is by 8.7%, which is smaller than several of the AMD's margins.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every core specification. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 7 250H has 14 cores and 20 threads. The Intel offers more cores and threads, which explains its Cinebench R15 multi-core win.

Base clocks differ significantly: the AMD runs at 3.60 GHz, while the Intel runs at 2.50 GHz. The boost clocks reverse the order, with the Intel reaching 5.40 GHz versus the AMD's 5.00 GHz. The AMD has a higher TDP of 55 watts against the Intel's 45 watts.

The sockets are different: the AMD uses AMD Socket FP11, while the Intel uses Intel BGA 1744. The process nodes also differ, with the AMD built on 4 nm by TSMC and the Intel on 10 nm by Intel. The AMD's die size is recorded as 2x 70.6 mm², while the Intel's die size is not recorded.

Cache configurations diverge. Both use 80 KB of L1 per core. The AMD uses 1 MB of L2 per core, while the Intel uses 2 MB per core. The L3 cache favors the AMD with 32 MB shared, versus 24 MB shared on the Intel.

Memory support is a key differentiator. The AMD supports LPDDR5X with a quad-channel bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, plus ECC memory. The Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus, no recorded bandwidth figure, and no ECC support. PCIe also differs: the AMD offers Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel offers Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only).

Integrated graphics differ as well. The AMD uses a Radeon 8060S, while the Intel uses Iris Xe Graphics 96EU. The release dates show the AMD launched on 2026-01-05, while the Intel launched on 2024-12-17. The Intel has a recorded launch MSRP of $502, while the AMD has no recorded launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 uses the Zen 5 architecture under the Strix Halo codename, part of the Ryzen AI Max generation. The Intel Core 7 250H uses the Raptor Lake architecture under the Raptor Lake-H codename, part of the Raptor Lake Refresh generation. This generational difference is significant: Zen 5 is a newer core design than Raptor Lake.

The process technology strongly favors the AMD, which is manufactured on a 4 nm node by TSMC. The Intel is manufactured on a 10 nm node by Intel. The smaller process node typically allows for better power efficiency and higher transistor density, which aligns with the AMD's performance advantages in most tests despite having fewer cores.

Cache architecture differs in the L2 and L3 levels. The Intel has a larger L2 cache per core at 2 MB versus 1 MB on the AMD, but the AMD has a larger shared L3 cache at 32 MB versus 24 MB on the Intel. The L1 cache is identical at 80 KB per core.

Memory architecture is a major architectural difference. The AMD's quad-channel LPDDR5X support with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth provides a much wider memory path than the Intel's dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 support. The AMD also supports ECC memory, which the Intel does not. This memory bandwidth advantage likely contributes to the AMD's strong performance in data compression and sorting tests.

The integrated graphics differ architecturally as well. The AMD pairs its CPU with a Radeon 8060S, while the Intel uses Iris Xe Graphics 96EU. The AMD also carries a different part number (100-000001980) versus the Intel's SRQ6UQ5MK. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 wins in virtually every workload category recorded. Its strongest areas are extended instruction processing, where it leads by 88.9%, and data compression, where it leads by 32.2%. These results indicate a substantial advantage for scientific computing, encryption, and data-heavy applications. The AMD also wins multithreaded PassMark by 23.9% and random string sorting by 26.5%, reinforcing its strength in parallel and memory-intensive tasks.

For modern multi-core rendering, the AMD wins Cinebench R23 multi-core by 13.3%, which is the more relevant test compared to the older R15 version. The AMD also wins floating-point math by 11.7% and integer math by 10.6%, making it the better choice for numerical simulations and general computation. Prime number finding goes to the AMD by 36.8%, and data encryption by 10.4%. Even in single-core tasks, the AMD holds narrow leads in both Cinebench R23 and PassMark single-thread tests.

The Intel Core 7 250H wins exactly one recorded benchmark: Cinebench R15 multi-core, where it leads by 8.7%. This older test appears to favor the Intel's higher core count of 14 versus 8, and its 20 threads versus 16. For users running legacy software that relies on the R15 rendering path, the Intel provides a measurable advantage. The Intel also has a higher boost clock of 5.40 GHz, which may benefit lightly threaded legacy applications, though the recorded single-core tests do not show a win for the Intel.

The data indicates that the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is the superior processor for modern workloads, memory bandwidth-sensitive tasks, and instruction-heavy computation. The Intel Core 7 250H is the better pick only for the specific Cinebench R15 multi-core scenario, where its additional cores and threads deliver a win. For all other recorded benchmarks, the AMD leads, often by substantial double-digit margins. The AMD's higher average score (49796 versus 35728) and higher percentile ranking (90th versus 85th) confirm its overall dominance in the database.