AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 vs Intel Core i5-14400F Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents a clear split between these two processors. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 wins 12 of the 15 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, while the Intel Core i5-14400F takes 3. The margin and nature of those wins, however, tell a more nuanced story than the raw win count suggests.

The Intel Core i5-14400F claims its most decisive victory in Cinebench R23 single-core, scoring 3055 against the AMD chip's 1960, a gap of 35.8 percent. That is the largest single delta in either direction across the entire comparison set. The Intel part also wins Cinebench R23 multi-core with 21645 versus 18759, a 13.3 percent advantage, and edges out the AMD processor in Cinebench R15 single-core, 307 versus 298, a slim 2.9 percent margin.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 counters with a dominant showing across the PassMark suite. Its largest win comes in PassMark find prime numbers, where it scores 145 against Intel's 86, a 68.6 percent advantage. PassMark extended instructions shows a 64.1 percent lead, with scores of 32719 versus 19937. In PassMark integer math, the AMD chip posts 109588 against 81524, a 34.4 percent margin. PassMark random string sorting goes to AMD by 32.2 percent, 43196 versus 32680. PassMark multithread favors AMD at 33486 versus 25470, a 31.5 percent gap. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows AMD ahead 2872 versus 2181, a 31.7 percent lead. PassMark data compression delivers a 27.1 percent win for AMD, 400887 versus 315521. PassMark physics gives AMD a 21 percent margin, 1843 versus 1523. PassMark floating point math goes to AMD by 18.6 percent, 72722 versus 61319. PassMark data encryption shows AMD ahead by 18.5 percent, 20092 versus 16949. PassMark single-thread results put AMD at 4185 versus Intel's 3701, a 13.1 percent lead.

The overall average benchmark scores reinforce the AMD advantage. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 carries an average benchmark score of 49796, while the Core i5-14400F sits at 32279. The percentile rankings follow the same direction: the AMD part lands in the 90th percentile among all CPUs, the Intel part in the 83rd.

The nearest-rival data for the AMD chip places it alongside the Intel Core 9 273PE at 49845 (a 0.1 percent gap), the Intel Core i5-14600KF at 49394 (0.8 percent behind AMD), the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 at 49228 (1.2 percent behind), and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G at 49196 (1.2 percent behind). The Intel Core i5-14400F, by contrast, sits near the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U at 32233 (0.1 percent ahead of Intel), the Intel Core i9-11900 at 32226 (0.2 percent ahead), the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS at 32354 (0.2 percent behind), and the Intel Core i7-12800H at 32121 (0.5 percent ahead). These clusters indicate that the two processors operate in entirely different performance tiers, with the AMD part competing against substantially stronger hardware.

The Verdict

The data shows two processors aimed at different workloads with different performance identities. The Intel Core i5-14400F demonstrates a clear single-core advantage, particularly in Cinebench R23 single-core where its 35.8 percent lead is the largest margin recorded in any test. That strength, combined with its Cinebench R23 multi-core win, suggests the Intel part favors lightly threaded applications and workloads that respond well to high clock speeds.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388, however, dominates the broader PassMark suite, winning encryption, compression, extended instructions, prime number finding, floating point math, integer math, multithread, physics, random string sorting, and single-thread tests. Its average benchmark score of 49796 exceeds the Intel part's 32279 by a substantial margin. The 90th percentile placement versus the 83rd percentile placement confirms that the AMD chip sits in a higher overall performance class.

The choice between these two depends entirely on the workload profile. The Intel part is the stronger option for Cinebench-style rendering workloads and single-core-bound applications. The AMD part is the stronger option for the mixed workload patterns captured by the PassMark suite, which includes data processing, encryption, and mathematical operations. The AMD chip's 12 wins out of 15 comparisons, including all but one PassMark test, make it the broader performer in the recorded data.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies and manufacturing processes. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 uses the Zen 5 architecture under the Strix Halo codename, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core i5-14400F uses the Raptor Lake architecture under the Raptor Lake-R codename, built on a 10 nm process at Intel. The die sizes reflect the process gap: the AMD chip uses a 2x 70.6 mm² configuration, while the Intel die measures 215 mm².

Core counts differ significantly. The AMD processor has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel processor has 10 cores and 16 threads. Both parts have the same thread count, but the Intel chip achieves it with two additional physical cores. The base clocks tell a similar story in reverse: the AMD chip runs at 3.60 GHz base and 5.00 GHz boost, while the Intel chip runs at 2.50 GHz base and 4.70 GHz boost. The AMD chip has the higher clock ceiling, yet the Intel chip wins the single-core tests, which points to architectural efficiency differences rather than raw clock speed.

Cache configurations diverge as well. Both parts share an 80 KB L1 cache per core. The L2 cache differs: the AMD chip has 1 MB per core, the Intel chip has 1.25 MB per core. The L3 cache shows a larger gap in the other direction: the AMD chip has 32 MB shared, the Intel chip has 20 MB shared. TDP ratings place the AMD chip at 55 watts and the Intel chip at 65 watts, making the AMD part the lower-power design despite its higher performance tier.

Memory support differs by generation and channel count. The AMD chip uses LPDDR5X memory over a quad-channel bus with 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel chip supports both DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, with no bandwidth figure recorded. Both parts support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity also differs: the AMD chip uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel chip uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only).

The integrated graphics situation is stark. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 includes a Radeon 8060S integrated GPU. The Intel Core i5-14400F has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A. The market segments reflect this: the AMD part is a Mobile processor on AMD Socket FP11, while the Intel part is a Desktop processor on Intel Socket 1700. The socket difference alone makes these parts incompatible with the same motherboards.

Release dates also separate the two. The AMD chip was released on January 5, 2026, while the Intel chip was released on January 7, 2024. Both parts remain in active production. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. The Intel part has a recorded launch MSRP of $196, which can be stated once as a data point; the AMD part has no launch MSRP recorded. The part numbers are 100-000001980 for AMD and SRN3RSRN47 for Intel.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmark comparisons?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 wins 12 of the 15 head-to-head comparisons. The Intel Core i5-14400F wins 3.

Q: Where does the Intel Core i5-14400F have its largest advantage?

A: The Intel part leads by 35.8 percent in Cinebench R23 single-core, scoring 3055 versus the AMD chip's 1960. It also wins Cinebench R23 multi-core by 13.3 percent and Cinebench R15 single-core by 2.9 percent.

Q: What is the largest win for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388?

A: The AMD chip leads by 68.6 percent in PassMark find prime numbers, scoring 145 versus Intel's 86. Its second-largest win is 64.1 percent in PassMark extended instructions.

Q: How do the overall average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has an average benchmark score of 49796. The Intel Core i5-14400F has an average benchmark score of 32279.

Q: Do these processors use the same memory type?

A: No. The AMD chip uses LPDDR5X over a quad-channel bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel chip supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus.

Q: Do both processors have integrated graphics?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 includes a Radeon 8060S integrated GPU. The Intel Core i5-14400F has no integrated graphics.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data supports a workload-based split. The Intel Core i5-14400F wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which indicates an advantage in sustained multi-threaded rendering workloads of the type that Cinebench measures. Its Cinebench R23 single-core and Cinebench R15 single-core wins point to strength in lightly threaded applications, legacy software, and tasks that depend on high per-core performance. The 2.9 percent margin in Cinebench R15 single-core is narrow, but the 35.8 percent margin in Cinebench R23 single-core is decisive.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 wins every PassMark test in the comparison set. PassMark data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, find prime numbers, floating point math, integer math, multithread, physics, random string sorting, and single-thread all go to AMD. The margins range from 13.1 percent in single-thread to 68.6 percent in prime numbers. The AMD chip also wins Cinebench R15 multi-core by 31.7 percent. This pattern indicates broad strength across data processing, cryptographic workloads, mathematical computation, and general multithreaded performance.

The average benchmark score difference of 49796 versus 32279 places these parts in different classes. The AMD chip's nearest rivals include the Intel Core 9 273PE, Intel Core i5-14600KF, AMD Ryzen 9 7900, and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G, all within 1.2 percent of its score. The Intel chip's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U, Intel Core i9-11900, AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS, and Intel Core i7-12800H, all within 0.5 percent. The gap between the two processors' peer groups is substantial.

For workloads measured by PassMark, the AMD chip is the clear choice based on the recorded data. For Cinebench-specific rendering workloads, the Intel chip demonstrates a measurable advantage, particularly in single-core performance. The AMD chip's lower TDP of 55 watts versus Intel's 65 watts adds an efficiency dimension, though the mobile versus desktop market segments make direct system-level comparisons dependent on platform context.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification category. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 uses 8 cores and 16 threads; the Intel Core i5-14400F uses 10 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 3.60 GHz for AMD and 2.50 GHz for Intel. Boost clocks are 5.00 GHz for AMD and 4.70 GHz for Intel. TDP is 55 watts for AMD and 65 watts for Intel.

The socket and platform targets are entirely different. AMD uses Socket FP11, a mobile platform, while Intel uses Socket 1700, a desktop platform. The AMD chip is built on the Zen 5 architecture with the Strix Halo codename. The Intel chip uses Raptor Lake with the Raptor Lake-R codename. Process nodes are 4 nm at TSMC for AMD and 10 nm at Intel for the Intel part. The AMD die is 2x 70.6 mm²; the Intel die is 215 mm².

Cache hierarchies differ in L2 and L3. Both have 80 KB L1 per core. AMD has 1 MB L2 per core; Intel has 1.25 MB L2 per core. AMD has 32 MB shared L3; Intel has 20 MB shared L3. Memory support is LPDDR5X for AMD over quad-channel with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, while Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5 over dual-channel with no bandwidth figure recorded. Both support ECC memory. PCIe is Gen 4 with 16 lanes for AMD and Gen 5 with 16 lanes for Intel. The AMD chip includes a Radeon 8060S integrated GPU; the Intel chip has no integrated graphics. Release dates are January 5, 2026 for AMD and January 7, 2024 for Intel. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. The Intel launch MSRP is $196; no launch MSRP is recorded for AMD.