AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 356H Comparison

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 and Intel Core Ultra 7 356H are two very different mobile processors, and the recorded benchmark data shows a clear split in their strengths. The AMD part wins 7 of the 15 head-to-head tests, while the Intel part wins 8, but the margins and the nature of those wins tell the real story. The Ryzen AI Max+ 388 dominates in integer-heavy and data-processing workloads, while the Core Ultra 7 356H excels in floating-point and physics-based tasks. The average benchmark score for the AMD processor is 49796, compared to 41215 for the Intel, a gap that places the AMD part at the 90th percentile versus the Intel part's 87th percentile.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is the clear leader in workloads that stress raw integer throughput and data manipulation. Its most decisive victory comes in PassMark integer math, where it scores 109588 against the Intel chip's 83111, a 31.9% advantage. This strength extends to data compression, where the AMD part scores 400887 versus 336177, a 19.2% lead, and to extended instruction workloads, where it wins 32719 to 27898, a 17.3% margin. The AMD processor also handles random string sorting better, posting 43196 against 40990, a 5.4% win. These results indicate the Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is better suited for database operations, compression tasks, and general productivity applications that rely on integer processing.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H takes the opposite side of the ledger. Its biggest win is in PassMark find prime numbers, where it scores 327 against the AMD part's 145, a massive 55.7% margin. It also dominates floating-point math with a score of 103128 versus 72722, a 29.5% advantage, and physics simulations with 2895 against 1843, a 36.3% lead. The Intel chip wins data encryption as well, posting 26345 versus 20092, a 23.7% margin. These results point to a processor that handles scientific computing, simulation, and encryption workloads more efficiently than the AMD alternative.

In multi-threaded and single-threaded performance, the two parts trade narrow wins. The Intel chip takes Cinebench R15 multicore with 3055 against 2872, a 6% lead, and also wins the R15 single-core test with 303 versus 298, a 1.7% margin. The AMD part wins Cinebench R23 multicore, scoring 18759 versus 18395, a 2% edge, and takes the PassMark single-thread test with 4185 versus 4072, a 2.8% lead. The Intel chip also edges out the AMD part in PassMark multithread, scoring 33978 versus 33486, a 1.4% margin.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 uses 8 cores and 16 threads built on the Zen 5 architecture, with the Strix Halo codename. It is manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H, by contrast, uses 16 cores and 16 threads, meaning it has no hyperthreading, built on the Panther Lake architecture. It is manufactured on Intel's 3 nm process.

Cache configurations differ significantly. The AMD part has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part has larger per-core caches at 192 KB of L1 and 2.5 MB of L2, but a smaller 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD processor's larger L3 pool likely contributes to its data compression and integer math wins, while the Intel part's larger per-core L2 cache may help in latency-sensitive single-threaded tasks.

Memory architecture is another major divergence. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 supports only LPDDR5X memory over a quad-channel bus, delivering a memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus, with a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, and it does not support ECC. The AMD part's quad-channel memory and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, more than double the Intel chip's 115.2 GB/s, likely underpins its strong performance in memory-intensive data workloads.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The AMD part uses PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part uses PCIe Gen 5 with 12 lanes (CPU only). The Intel chip has a newer PCIe standard, but the AMD chip offers more lanes. Integrated graphics differ as well, with the AMD part featuring Radeon 8060S and the Intel part featuring Intel Xe3 Graphics, though no graphics benchmarks are recorded in the database.

Clock speeds and power targets show contrasting approaches. The AMD processor has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, with a TDP of 55 W. The Intel processor has a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, with a TDP of 25 W. The AMD part runs at higher clock speeds and draws more power, while the Intel part operates at a significantly lower base clock but still reaches a competitive boost clock.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single win in the comparison belongs to the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H in PassMark find prime numbers. Its score of 327 versus 145 gives it a 55.7% advantage, the widest margin in any test. This result is consistent with the Intel chip's superior floating-point performance, as prime number finding relies heavily on mathematical operations.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 counters with a 31.9% win in PassMark integer math, scoring 109588 versus 83111. This is the AMD part's largest margin and reflects its strength in general-purpose arithmetic. The AMD chip also shows a 19.2% lead in data compression, scoring 400887 versus 336177, and a 17.3% lead in extended instructions, scoring 32719 versus 27898.

Floating-point performance heavily favors the Intel chip. In PassMark floating point math, the Intel part scores 103128 against the AMD part's 72722, a 29.5% margin. This advantage carries over to physics simulations, where the Intel chip wins 2895 versus 1843, a 36.3% margin. Data encryption also goes to Intel, with a score of 26345 versus 20092, a 23.7% lead.

The Cinebench results show a split across versions. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Intel part wins 3055 versus 2872, a 6% margin. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the AMD part wins 18759 versus 18395, a 2% margin. Single-core results also split, with the Intel part winning Cinebench R23 single-core at 2040 versus 1960, a 3.9% margin, but the AMD part winning PassMark single-thread at 4185 versus 4072, a 2.8% margin.

The multithread scores are nearly identical. The Intel part wins PassMark multithread with 33978 versus 33486, a 1.4% margin, and the AMD part wins random string sorting with 43196 versus 40990, a 5.4% margin. These close results indicate that overall throughput is similar, with the differences emerging in specific workload types rather than general multi-threaded performance.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has an average benchmark score of 49796, compared to 41215 for the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H. The AMD part sits at the 90th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel part sits at the 87th percentile.

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

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 wins Cinebench R23 multi-core with a score of 18759, against 18395 for the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H, a 2% advantage.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap in the head-to-head tests?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H scores 327 versus 145 for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388, a 55.7% advantage for Intel.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has a memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s over a quad-channel LPDDR5X bus. The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H has 115.2 GB/s over a dual-channel bus supporting DDR5 and LPDDR5X.

Q: Do the two CPUs have the same number of cores and threads?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H has 16 cores and 16 threads, indicating the Intel part does not use simultaneous multithreading.

Q: Which processor wins more head-to-head benchmark tests?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H wins 8 of the 15 head-to-head tests, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 wins 7. The Intel chip's wins tend to be larger in floating-point and physics workloads, while the AMD chip's wins are more concentrated in integer and data tasks.

The Verdict

The data shows two processors with distinct profiles. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is the correct choice for workloads dominated by integer math, data compression, and extended instruction sets. Its 31.9% lead in integer math and 19.2% lead in data compression make it the stronger option for productivity software, database operations, and general programming workloads. Its 5.4% win in random string sorting further supports this positioning.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H is the better option for floating-point-heavy tasks and physics simulations. Its 55.7% win in prime number finding and 36.3% win in physics, along with a 29.5% lead in floating-point math, make it the clear pick for scientific computing, simulation, and any workload that relies heavily on floating-point operations. Its 23.7% win in encryption also gives it an edge in security-related tasks.

For balanced multi-threaded workloads, the two parts are nearly equivalent. The Intel chip wins PassMark multithread by just 1.4%, while the AMD chip wins Cinebench R23 multicore by 2%. The AMD part's higher average benchmark score, 49796 versus 41215, reflects its stronger overall showing, but the Intel part's wins in several high-margin tests indicate it is not a one-sided competition.

The verdict hinges on workload type. Users whose tasks are integer-bound should select the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388. Users whose tasks are floating-point-bound should select the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H. The AMD processor also offers substantially higher memory bandwidth at 256.0 GB/s versus 115.2 GB/s, which may matter for memory-intensive applications. The Intel processor operates at a lower TDP of 25 W versus 55 W, which may be relevant for system power budgets, though the database records no thermal or efficiency benchmarks.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification category. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 uses 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H uses 16 cores and 16 threads. The AMD part has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and boost clock of 5.00 GHz, while the Intel part has a base clock of 1.90 GHz and boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The AMD TDP is 55 W, the Intel TDP is 25 W.

The AMD part is built on the Zen 5 architecture with the Strix Halo codename, using a 4 nm TSMC process with a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². The Intel part is built on the Panther Lake architecture, using a 3 nm Intel process with no die size recorded. Cache configurations differ: the AMD part has 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 32 MB L3 shared. The Intel part has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB L3 shared.

Memory support differs, with the AMD part using LPDDR5X over a quad-channel bus at 256.0 GB/s with ECC support. The Intel part uses DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus at 115.2 GB/s without ECC support. PCIe connectivity also differs: the AMD part uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes, the Intel part uses Gen 5 with 12 lanes. Integrated graphics are Radeon 8060S for AMD and Intel Xe3 Graphics for Intel. The AMD part uses socket AMD Socket FP11, while the Intel part uses Intel BGA 2540. Release dates differ by one day, with the AMD part releasing on 2026-01-05 and the Intel part on 2026-01-04.