AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 336H 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, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H records 34485. The AMD part sits at the 90th percentile versus all CPUs, while the Intel part sits at the 84th percentile.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H wins Cinebench R23 multi-core with a score of 23991, versus 18759 for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388. That is a 21.8% advantage for Intel in this specific test.

Q: Which processor handles integer math workloads better?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is significantly stronger in PassMark integer math, scoring 109588 versus 62070 for the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H. This represents a 76.6% lead for AMD.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H has 16 cores and 16 threads, meaning Intel offers twice the core count but the same thread count.

Q: Which processor has higher single-thread performance in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H scores 3387 in Cinebench R23 single-core, versus 1960 for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388. Intel leads by 42.1% in this test.

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

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 uses the Radeon 8060S, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics. The database does not provide direct graphics benchmark scores for either.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 wins 8 of the 15 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H wins 7. The split is close, but the workloads are sharply divided by type.

AMD dominates heavily in integer-heavy and data-throughput tasks. In PassMark integer math, AMD scores 109588 versus 62070, a 76.6% margin. Data compression shows AMD at 400887 versus 280340, a 43% lead. Extended instructions go to AMD at 32719 versus 24542, a 33.3% advantage. Random string sorting also favors AMD at 43196 versus 34402, a 25.6% margin. The multi-thread PassMark test goes to AMD at 33486 versus 28545, a 17.3% lead. Even in single-thread PassMark, AMD edges ahead at 4185 versus 4013, a 4.3% gain.

Intel wins in Cinebench workloads, which tend to stress sustained all-core rendering and single-core frequency. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, Intel scores 23991 versus 18759, a 21.8% win. In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 3387 versus 1960, a massive 42.1% lead. Intel also wins Cinebench R15 single-core at 341 versus 298, a 12.6% margin, while AMD takes Cinebench R15 multi-core at 2872 versus 2418, an 18.8% win. Intel wins PassMark physics at 2682 versus 1843, a 31.3% lead, and PassMark floating-point math at 82415 versus 72722, an 11.8% margin. PassMark data encryption slightly favors Intel at 21291 versus 20092, a 5.6% edge, and PassMark find prime numbers strongly favors Intel at 299 versus 145, a 51.5% margin.

The pattern is clear: AMD wins data manipulation and integer workloads, Intel wins rendering, physics, and single-core frequency-sensitive tests.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 uses the Zen 5 architecture under the Strix Halo codename, fabricated by TSMC on a 4 nm process. The die size is listed as 2x 70.6 mm². It supports LPDDR5X memory over a quad-channel bus, with a memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory. The AMD part uses a 55 W TDP and fits the AMD Socket FP11.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H uses the Panther Lake architecture under the Panther Lake codename, fabricated by Intel on a 3 nm process. It supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory over a dual-channel bus, with a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. It does not support ECC memory. The Intel part uses a 25 W TDP and fits the Intel BGA 2540 socket.

Cache organization differs substantially. The AMD chip has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3. The Intel chip has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. While Intel has larger per-core L1 and L2, AMD has nearly double the shared L3 capacity.

PCIe support also differs. The AMD part provides PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part provides PCIe Gen 5 with 12 lanes (CPU only). Intel's PCIe generation is newer, but AMD offers more lanes.

Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. Both are listed as active production parts, with AMD released on 2026-01-05 and Intel on 2026-01-04.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification category. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has 8 cores and 16 threads; the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 3.60 GHz for AMD and 1.90 GHz for Intel. Boost clocks are 5.00 GHz for AMD and 4.60 GHz for Intel. TDP is 55 W for AMD and 25 W for Intel.

Memory support differs: AMD uses only LPDDR5X, while Intel supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Memory bus width is quad-channel for AMD and dual-channel for Intel. Memory bandwidth is 256.0 GB/s for AMD and 115.2 GB/s for Intel. ECC memory support is present on AMD and absent on Intel.

Socket types are entirely different: AMD Socket FP11 versus Intel BGA 2540. Process nodes are 4 nm (TSMC) for AMD and 3 nm (Intel) for Intel. Foundries are TSMC for AMD and Intel for Intel. The Intel die size is not recorded in the database, while AMD lists 2x 70.6 mm².

Integrated graphics differ: Radeon 8060S on AMD versus Intel Xe3 Graphics on Intel. The AMD part number is 100-000001980; the Intel part number is SA4RD. Neither has a launch MSRP recorded.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single win for AMD is in PassMark integer math, where the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 scores 109588 against 62070 for the Core Ultra 5 336H, a 76.6% delta. This is a dominant result for integer-heavy code. Data compression is the second-largest AMD win at 400887 versus 280340, a 43% margin. Extended instructions follow at 32719 versus 24542, a 33.3% delta. Random string sorting shows AMD ahead at 43196 versus 34402, a 25.6% margin. PassMark multi-thread goes to AMD at 33486 versus 28545, a 17.3% delta. Cinebench R15 multi-core favors AMD at 2872 versus 2418, an 18.8% margin. PassMark single-thread narrowly favors AMD at 4185 versus 4013, a 4.3% delta.

The largest single win for Intel is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Core Ultra 5 336H scores 3387 against 1960 for the Ryzen AI Max+ 388, a 42.1% delta. PassMark find prime numbers is the second-largest Intel win at 299 versus 145, a 51.5% margin. PassMark physics shows Intel ahead at 2682 versus 1843, a 31.3% delta. Cinebench R23 multi-core favors Intel at 23991 versus 18759, a 21.8% margin. Cinebench R15 single-core goes to Intel at 341 versus 298, a 12.6% delta. PassMark floating-point math favors Intel at 82415 versus 72722, an 11.8% margin. PassMark data encryption narrowly favors Intel at 21291 versus 20092, a 5.6% delta.

The database records 15 head-to-head comparisons. AMD wins 8, Intel wins 7. The average benchmark score, however, shows a much wider gap: AMD at 49796 versus Intel at 34485, a difference of roughly 44% in AMD's favor.

The Verdict

The data presents two processors with complementary strengths rather than a single outright winner. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 holds the higher average benchmark score at 49796, placing it at the 90th percentile of all CPUs. It wins the PassMark multi-thread test and dominates integer math, data compression, extended instructions, and random string sorting. For workloads that involve data processing, encryption, compression, or general integer arithmetic, the AMD part delivers substantially higher throughput. Its quad-channel LPDDR5X memory at 256.0 GB/s likely explains its strong showing in memory-bandwidth-sensitive tasks like data compression.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H, with a lower average score of 34485 and an 84th percentile ranking, wins Cinebench R23 multi-core and single-core by wide margins. Its 16 physical cores, despite the same thread count, give it an advantage in rendering and physics simulations. The 42.1% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core suggests a significantly higher frequency ceiling per core, despite a lower boost clock of 4.60 GHz versus 5.00 GHz for AMD. The Intel part also wins floating-point math, prime number finding, and data encryption.

The choice depends on the target workload. For users running integer-heavy data pipelines, compression tasks, or multi-threaded PassMark-style workloads, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is the stronger performer. For users running Cinebench-style rendering, physics simulations, or single-core frequency-sensitive applications, the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H is clearly ahead. The Intel part also uses substantially less power at 25 W versus 55 W, which matters for mobile chassis design, though the AMD part offers nearly double the memory bandwidth and ECC support. The recorded data does not indicate a universal winner, but it does show two distinctly specialized processors.