AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 vs Intel Core Ultra 9 288V Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data separates these two mobile processors into distinct roles. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 wins 11 of 15 head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 288V takes 4. The AMD part posts an average benchmark score of 49796, placing it at the 90th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel part averages 23219, which lands at the 76th percentile. That gap is enormous: the AMD chip is roughly 114% higher in average score, meaning it sits in a completely different performance class for most workloads.

For users whose primary tasks involve heavy multi-threaded rendering, data compression, or integer math, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is the clear choice. It delivers 18759 points in Cinebench R23 multi-core versus 10178 for the Intel chip, an 84.3% advantage. The AMD part also dominates in PassMark integer math with 109588 versus 44019, a 149% lead. Any workload that scales across threads will favor the AMD processor heavily.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 288V has a narrower but real set of advantages. It wins single-thread tests, including PassMark single thread at 4274 versus 4185 (a 2.1% edge) and Cinebench R15 single-core at 301.5 versus 298 (a 1.2% edge). It also wins the prime number finding test, 195 versus 145, a 25.6% margin. Users who prioritize raw single-core responsiveness or specific math workloads that benefit from Intel's architecture should consider the Intel part. Its lower TDP of 30 watts versus 55 watts also suggests it fits into thinner, lighter chassis designs.

Choose the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 for maximum throughput in rendering, compression, encryption, and floating-point work. Choose the Intel Core Ultra 9 288V for efficiency-focused designs that still need competitive single-thread performance and occasional wins in specific integer workloads like prime number searches.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 uses the Zen 5 architecture on the Strix Halo codename, built on a 4 nm TSMC process. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, meaning each core supports two threads simultaneously. The Intel Core Ultra 9 288V uses the Lunar Lake architecture, also made by TSMC but on a more advanced 3 nm node. It has 8 cores and 8 threads, with no simultaneous multithreading. The process node advantage for Intel is real, but the thread count advantage for AMD is more significant in the measured results.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The AMD chip provides 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, but only 12 MB of shared L3. Intel's larger per-core L1 and L2 caches help with single-threaded latency, which shows in its single-core benchmark wins. AMD's larger shared L3 pool benefits multi-threaded workloads that reuse data across cores.

Memory architecture also diverges. The AMD part uses quad-channel LPDDR5X with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth and supports ECC memory. The Intel part uses dual-channel LPDDR5X with 136.5 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC support. The AMD chip has nearly double the memory bandwidth, which directly contributes to its large wins in data compression and encryption tests. PCIe connectivity differs too: AMD provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while Intel provides Gen 5 with 4 lanes. Intel's newer PCIe standard offers higher per-lane bandwidth, but AMD's lane count allows more simultaneous devices.

Both use LPDDR5X memory and target the mobile segment. Both are current active production parts. The AMD part released on 2026-01-05, while the Intel part released earlier on 2024-09-23. Neither has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not supported for either. The integrated graphics differ as well: AMD uses Radeon 8060S, Intel uses Arc 140V. The database does not include graphics benchmarks, so the comparison remains limited to CPU-side metrics.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 dominates multi-threaded and data-heavy workloads. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows an 84.3% lead, and Cinebench R15 multi-core shows an 81.4% lead. PassMark multithread gives AMD a 69% advantage at 33486 versus 19810. These results indicate the AMD processor is the stronger choice for video rendering, 3D scene compilation, and any task that uses all available threads.

Data compression and encryption heavily favor AMD. The compression test shows 400887 versus 186521, a 114.9% lead. Encryption shows 20092 versus 14141, a 42.1% lead. The extended instructions test, which measures SIMD and vector workloads, gives AMD a 109.6% advantage at 32719 versus 15613. Floating-point math also goes to AMD by 22.1% at 72722 versus 59536. Random string sorting, another memory-intensive workload, favors AMD by 90.9% at 43196 versus 22622. These wins align with the AMD part's higher memory bandwidth and larger L3 cache.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 288V wins in three distinct areas. Single-thread performance is its strongest suit: PassMark single thread shows 4274 versus 4185, a 2.1% edge, and Cinebench R15 single-core shows 301.5 versus 298, a 1.2% edge. It also wins Cinebench R23 single-core by a narrow 0.5% margin at 1960 versus 1950. The prime number finding test is the only major Intel win, showing 195 versus 145, a 25.6% advantage. This test likely benefits from Intel's larger per-core L1 and L2 caches.

Physics simulation slightly favors AMD at 1843 versus 1637, a 12.6% lead. That result falls between the extremes, suggesting AMD's advantage shrinks in workloads that are less dependent on raw memory bandwidth. Overall, the Intel chip wins only where per-core latency matters most, while AMD wins everything else.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has an average benchmark score of 49796, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 288V has 23219. The AMD part also sits at the 90th percentile of all CPUs versus the 76th percentile for Intel.

Q: Does the Intel chip win any multi-threaded tests?

A: No. The AMD chip wins every multi-threaded comparison in the database, including Cinebench R15 and R23 multi-core, PassMark multithread, and all PassMark math and data tests except prime number finding.

Q: Why does the AMD chip win so many memory-intensive tests?

A: The AMD part uses a quad-channel memory bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, versus dual-channel with 136.5 GB/s for Intel. It also has 32 MB of shared L3 cache versus 12 MB for Intel. These factors explain the large margins in compression, encryption, and string sorting.

Q: What is the single-thread performance difference?

A: The Intel chip leads PassMark single thread by 2.1% (4274 versus 4185) and Cinebench R15 single-core by 1.2% (301.5 versus 298). In Cinebench R23 single-core, AMD leads by 0.5% (1960 versus 1950). The differences are small, within a few points either way.

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has 16 threads from 8 cores. The Intel Core Ultra 9 288V has 8 threads from 8 cores. Intel does not use simultaneous multithreading on this part.

Q: How do they compare in power consumption?

A: The AMD part has a TDP of 55 watts. The Intel part has a TDP of 30 watts. The database does not include measured power draw, only the thermal design power ratings.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single win for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 comes in PassMark integer math, where it scores 109588 versus 44019 for Intel, a 149% advantage. This is the most decisive result in the entire comparison. It indicates that the AMD processor's execution units and memory subsystem handle integer operations far more efficiently than Intel's Lunar Lake design.

Data compression shows the second-largest margin at 114.9%. AMD scores 400887, Intel scores 186521. Compression workloads depend heavily on memory bandwidth and cache behavior, and AMD's 256.0 GB/s quad-channel bus plus 32 MB L3 cache provide a decisive advantage over Intel's 136.5 GB/s dual-channel setup with 12 MB L3.

Extended instructions, which measures SIMD and vector processing, gives AMD a 109.6% lead at 32719 versus 15613. This aligns with AMD's larger thread count and higher memory bandwidth, both of which help feed vector execution units. Random string sorting follows at 90.9% in favor of AMD, with scores of 43196 and 22622.

Multi-threaded Cinebench results confirm the pattern. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows AMD at 18759 versus 10178, an 84.3% lead. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 2872 versus 1583, an 81.4% lead. PassMark multithread gives AMD 33486 versus 19810, a 69% lead. These three tests all measure sustained multi-core throughput, and the AMD part wins each by a wide margin.

Data encryption favors AMD by 42.1%, with scores of 20092 and 14141. Floating-point math gives AMD a 22.1% lead at 72722 versus 59536. Physics simulation shows a smaller 12.6% advantage for AMD at 1843 versus 1637. Even in tests where AMD wins by smaller margins, the direction is consistent.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 288V wins only four comparisons. The prime number finding test is its biggest win at 25.6%, scoring 195 versus 145. This test likely benefits from Intel's larger per-core L1 cache (192 KB versus 80 KB) and L2 cache (2.5 MB versus 1 MB). PassMark single thread shows Intel ahead by 2.1% at 4274 versus 4185. Cinebench R15 single-core gives Intel a 1.2% edge at 301.5 versus 298. Cinebench R23 single-core is the closest result, with AMD winning by 0.5% at 1960 versus 1950. The single-thread differences are small enough that real-world applications would rarely show a meaningful gap.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every hardware specification. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 288V has 8 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks differ: AMD runs at 3.60 GHz, Intel at 3.30 GHz. Boost clocks are close: AMD at 5.00 GHz, Intel at 5.10 GHz, giving Intel a slight 0.10 GHz edge at peak.

Thermal design power is a major differentiator. AMD lists 55 watts TDP, Intel lists 30 watts. The Intel part uses less than half the thermal budget of the AMD part, which affects chassis design and cooling requirements. Socket types are incompatible: AMD uses Socket FP11, Intel uses BGA 2833.

Process nodes differ by one step. AMD uses TSMC 4 nm, Intel uses TSMC 3 nm. The smaller node gives Intel a potential efficiency advantage, which aligns with its lower TDP. Cache layouts are entirely different. AMD provides 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 32 MB shared L3. Intel provides 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3. Intel has more per-core cache, AMD has more shared cache.

Memory support shows the same LPDDR5X type, but the bus configuration differs. AMD uses quad-channel with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support. Intel uses dual-channel with 136.5 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC. PCIe versions differ: AMD uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes, Intel uses Gen 5 with 4 lanes. Integrated graphics are Radeon 8060S for AMD and Arc 140V for Intel.

The AMD part has a die size of 2x 70.6 mm², while Intel's die size is not recorded in the database. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. Both are mobile market segments with active production status. AMD released on 2026-01-05, Intel on 2024-09-23. The AMD part number is 100-000001980, while Intel lists SRPMSSRPMWQ5JTQ5JUQ5KW. Neither has a launch MSRP recorded in the database.