AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 vs Intel Core 7 360 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark comparison between the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 and the Intel Core 7 360 is decisively one-sided. Across the 15 recorded head-to-head tests, the AMD part wins 13, while the Intel chip takes only 2. The magnitude of those AMD victories, however, is what truly defines this matchup.

The largest gap appears in PassMark integer math. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores 109,588 against 34,238 for the Core 7 360, a 220.1% advantage. This is not a marginal difference; it is a complete rout in a workload that reflects general arithmetic processing. Data compression shows a similar story, with the AMD part hitting 400,887 versus 142,877, a 180.6% lead. Extended instruction throughput also favors AMD heavily, 32,719 against 12,390, a 164.1% gap. Random string sorting follows at 144.9% ahead, with scores of 43,196 and 17,636.

Multi-threaded rendering reinforces the pattern. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 posts 2,872 points, more than double the Core 7 360's 1,374, a 109% margin. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a narrower but still substantial 37.6% lead: 18,759 versus 13,634. PassMark multi-thread scoring lands at 33,486 for AMD versus 15,544 for Intel, a 115.4% difference.

The AMD processor also wins in data encryption, 20,092 to 11,164, an 80% edge, and in floating-point math, 72,722 to 44,963, a 61.7% margin. Physics simulation favors AMD by 51.9% (1,843 versus 1,213), and prime number finding is closer, 145 to 120, a 20.8% lead. Even single-core Cinebench R23, often a strong suit for Intel, goes to AMD, though narrowly: 1,960 versus 1,924, a 1.9% edge. Cinebench R15 single-core is more decisive for AMD, 298 against 193, a 54.4% difference.

The Intel Core 7 360 wins exactly two tests, both PassMark single-thread entries. The scores are 4,274 versus 4,185, a 2.1% margin. These are effectively the same test recorded under two names, so the practical single-thread advantage for Intel is small.

Where Each One Wins

The data points to a clear division of strengths. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 dominates threaded workloads, content creation, and any task that scales with core count and memory bandwidth. Its wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core, PassMark multi-thread, and integer math indicate strong performance in video rendering, code compilation, and data processing. The 180.6% lead in compression and the 164.1% lead in extended instructions suggest heavy number-crunching tasks run far better on the AMD chip.

The Intel Core 7 360 has a single, narrow victory in raw single-thread throughput. The 2.1% PassMark single-thread lead means lightly threaded applications, such as basic office work or legacy software, will feel similar on both. But the margin is small enough that it does not represent a meaningful practical advantage. The Core 7 360 also operates at a much lower 15 W TDP, which positions it for fanless or ultra-portable designs where sustained performance is secondary to power draw.

For users running multi-core workloads, the AMD part is the clear choice. The 109% lead in Cinebench R15 multi-core and the 115.4% lead in PassMark multi-thread show that the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 delivers roughly double the throughput in these scenarios. The Intel chip is better suited to low-power tasks where the 15 W envelope matters more than raw score.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 uses the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Strix Halo, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It packs 8 cores and 16 threads, with simultaneous multithreading enabled. The Intel Core 7 360 uses the Wildcat Lake codename, built on a 3 nm process at Intel, but offers only 6 cores and 6 threads with no hyperthreading. That thread count difference alone explains much of the multi-core gap.

Cache layouts differ substantially. The AMD part has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3. The Intel chip features 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, but only 6 MB of shared L3. Intel's larger per-core L1 and L2 caches do not compensate for the much smaller shared L3 pool in multi-core workloads.

Memory architecture is another major divergence. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 uses LPDDR5X over a quad-channel bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The Core 7 360 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, but only on a single-channel bus, capping bandwidth at 59.7 GB/s. That is a 4.3x difference in theoretical memory throughput, which heavily impacts bandwidth-sensitive tasks like compression and integer math.

The AMD processor integrates Radeon 8060S graphics, while the Intel chip uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. Both are mobile parts, but the AMD solution targets heavier graphics workloads. The AMD chip also supports ECC memory; the Intel part does not. PCIe connectivity differs too, with AMD offering Gen 4 with 16 lanes versus Intel's Gen 4 with 6 lanes, both CPU-only.

The process node advantage goes to Intel at 3 nm versus AMD's 4 nm, but the benchmark data shows that architectural choices, such as thread count and memory width, outweigh the node difference in practice.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts set the tone: AMD has 8 cores and 16 threads, Intel has 6 cores and 6 threads. Clock speeds differ as well. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 runs at a 3.60 GHz base and 5.00 GHz boost. The Core 7 360 has a 1.50 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost. Despite the lower clocks, the Intel part manages a small single-thread win in PassMark, which suggests efficient core design, but the base clock gap is enormous.

TDP is a major separator. AMD lists 55 W, while Intel lists 15 W. That 40 W difference explains why the Intel chip is found in low-power systems, but it also caps sustained performance. The AMD processor uses an AMD Socket FP11, while Intel uses Intel BGA 1516. Both are mobile sockets.

Memory support diverges: AMD supports LPDDR5X only, Intel supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The memory bus width differs, quad-channel for AMD versus single-channel for Intel, and the bandwidth figures follow, 256.0 GB/s against 59.7 GB/s. ECC memory is available on AMD but not on Intel.

The integrated graphics differ, Radeon 8060S on AMD versus Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) on Intel. PCIe lane counts also differ, 16 lanes for AMD and 6 lanes for Intel, both Gen 4. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $426. The AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP. Both processors have locked multipliers.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

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

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD part scores 18,759 versus 13,634 for Intel, a 37.6% lead. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the gap grows to 109% (2,872 versus 1,374).

Q: Does the Intel chip win any benchmarks?

A: Yes. The Intel Core 7 360 wins both PassMark single-thread tests, scoring 4,274 versus 4,185, a 2.1% advantage.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD processor supports quad-channel LPDDR5X with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel processor uses single-channel DDR5 or LPDDR5X with 59.7 GB/s.

Q: What are the TDP ratings?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has a 55 W TDP. The Intel Core 7 360 has a 15 W TDP.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 7 360 does not.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 outperforms the Intel Core 7 360 in 13 of 15 recorded tests, often by massive margins. The largest gaps appear in integer math (220.1%), data compression (180.6%), and extended instructions (164.1%). The AMD part also delivers more than double the multi-threaded throughput in Cinebench R15 and PassMark multi-thread, and it provides 4.3x the memory bandwidth.

The Intel Core 7 360 wins only the PassMark single-thread test, and by a slim 2.1% margin. Its advantages lie in power efficiency, with a 15 W TDP versus 55 W, and a slightly smaller 3 nm process node. For a system where battery life and cooling are the top priorities, the Intel chip fits that role. For any workload that stresses multiple cores, memory bandwidth, or sustained compute, the AMD part is the superior choice.

The recorded data shows a 90th percentile ranking for the AMD processor against all CPUs, while the Intel chip sits at the 72nd percentile. The nearest rivals for the AMD part, such as the Intel Core 9 273PE and AMD Ryzen 9 7900, score within 1.2% of its average, placing it in desktop-class territory. The Intel Core 7 360, by contrast, sits alongside chips like the Intel Core i3-13100 and Core i3-14100, with average scores within 0.4% of its own. The Core 7 360 is a low-power efficiency part. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is a high-performance mobile processor that competes with desktop silicon. Choose accordingly.