AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 vs Intel Processor 300T Comparison

AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 vs Intel Processor 300T

The database places the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 at the 90th percentile among all CPUs, while the Intel Processor 300T sits at the 50th percentile. The AMD part records an average benchmark score of 49,796, whereas the Intel part has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, and its average score is listed as zero. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, while the Intel Processor 300T uses the Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm Intel process. The AMD chip is a mobile part with 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel chip is a desktop part with 2 cores and 4 threads. These differences in core count, process node, and market segment produce a wide gap in measured performance, as the data indicates.

The Verdict

The benchmark data shows a decisive performance advantage for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388. Across all recorded tests, the AMD part delivers scores that are multiples of what the Intel Processor 300T would need to achieve to match it, though the Intel part has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 records a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 18,759 and a single-core score of 1,960. The Intel Processor 300T has no such scores recorded, meaning direct head-to-head comparisons are impossible from the recorded data alone. However, the AMD part's percentile rank of 90 versus the Intel part's percentile rank of 50 indicates that the AMD chip outperforms the vast majority of CPUs, while the Intel chip sits near the middle of the distribution.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is clearly the part for workloads that demand high multi-threaded throughput. Its 8 cores, 16 threads, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache allow it to handle parallel tasks with substantial efficiency. The Intel Processor 300T, with only 2 cores and 4 threads, is a much simpler part. The data shows that the AMD chip has a 55 W TDP, while the Intel chip has a 35 W TDP, so the Intel part consumes less power by specification. For users who need maximum computational performance in a mobile form factor, the AMD part is the clear choice based on the recorded data. For users who require a low-power desktop processor for basic tasks, the Intel part may suffice, but the database contains no performance scores to substantiate any capability beyond its specifications.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 also includes a more capable integrated graphics solution, the Radeon 8060S, compared to the Intel UHD Graphics 710. The AMD part supports LPDDR5X memory with quad-channel configuration and a memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s, while the Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration with no recorded memory bandwidth figure. The AMD part supports ECC memory, which the Intel part does not. These features position the AMD part as a more complete package for demanding applications.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Processor 300T has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: What is the process node for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 uses a 4 nm process from TSMC. The Intel Processor 300T uses a 10 nm process from Intel.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor have?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Processor 300T has 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 supports ECC memory. The Intel Processor 300T does not support ECC memory.

Q: What is the TDP of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has a TDP of 55 W. The Intel Processor 300T has a TDP of 35 W.

Q: What integrated graphics does each processor use?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 uses the Radeon 8060S. The Intel Processor 300T uses the UHD Graphics 710.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is built on the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Strix Halo, and manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Processor 300T is built on the Raptor Lake architecture, codenamed Raptor Lake-S, and manufactured on a 10 nm process at Intel. These architectural differences are fundamental. The AMD part uses a newer, denser process node, which typically allows for higher transistor density and better power efficiency. The Intel part uses an older process node, which results in larger die sizes for the given feature set.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has a die size listed as 2x 70.6 mm², indicating a chiplet design with two dies. The Intel Processor 300T has a die size of 163 mm², which is a monolithic design. The AMD part's L1 cache is 80 KB per core, identical to the Intel part's L1 cache of 80 KB per core. However, the L2 cache differs: the AMD part has 1 MB per core, while the Intel part has 1.25 MB per core. The L3 cache differs significantly: the AMD part has 32 MB shared, while the Intel part has 6 MB shared. This larger L3 cache on the AMD part is a substantial advantage for workloads that benefit from large amounts of fast, shared memory.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 uses the AMD Socket FP11, while the Intel Processor 300T uses Intel Socket 1700. The AMD part supports PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part supports PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). This gives the Intel part a newer PCIe standard, though the AMD part's PCIe Gen 4 is still a capable interface. The AMD part supports LPDDR5X memory in a quad-channel configuration, while the Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The AMD part's memory bandwidth is recorded as 256.0 GB/s, while the Intel part has no memory bandwidth figure recorded.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 includes the Radeon 8060S integrated graphics, while the Intel Processor 300T includes the UHD Graphics 710. The AMD part supports ECC memory, while the Intel part does not. The AMD part has a production status of Active and a release date of 2026-01-05. The Intel part has a production status of Active and a release date of 2024-01-07. The AMD part has a part number of 100-000001980, while the Intel part has a part number of SRN3K. The AMD part is not multiplier unlocked, and the Intel part is also not multiplier unlocked.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every specification field. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Processor 300T has 2 cores and 4 threads. The AMD part has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel part has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and no boost clock recorded in the database. The AMD part has a TDP of 55 W, while the Intel part has a TDP of 35 W.

The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP11, while the Intel part uses Intel Socket 1700. The AMD part is based on Zen 5 architecture with the codename Strix Halo, while the Intel part is based on Raptor Lake architecture with the codename Raptor Lake-S. The AMD part uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, while the Intel part uses a 10 nm process from Intel. The AMD part has a die size of 2x 70.6 mm², while the Intel part has a die size of 163 mm².

The cache hierarchy differs. The AMD part has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, identical to the Intel part. The AMD part has 1 MB of L2 cache per core, while the Intel part has 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core. The AMD part has 32 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel part has 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part supports LPDDR5X memory, while the Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory. The AMD part uses a quad-channel memory bus with a recorded bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s, while the Intel part uses a dual-channel memory bus with no recorded bandwidth.

The AMD part supports ECC memory, while the Intel part does not. The AMD part uses PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part uses PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The AMD part has the Radeon 8060S as integrated graphics, while the Intel part has the UHD Graphics 710. The AMD part targets the mobile market segment, while the Intel part targets the desktop market segment. The AMD part has a release date of 2026-01-05, while the Intel part has a release date of 2024-01-07. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $82, which is stated once here as recorded in the database. The AMD part has no launch MSRP recorded.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 and the Intel Processor 300T. The Intel Processor 300T has an empty benchmarks array, meaning no Cinebench, PassMark, or other tests are recorded for it. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388, in contrast, has a comprehensive set of benchmark scores across multiple tests. This lack of data for the Intel part prevents any direct numeric comparison between the two in specific tests.

However, the AMD part's recorded scores provide a reference point. In Cinebench R15, the AMD part scores 2,872 in multi-core and 298 in single-core. In Cinebench R23, it scores 18,759 in multi-core and 1,960 in single-core. In PassMark tests, the AMD part scores 400,887 in data compression, 20,092 in data encryption, 32,719 in extended instructions, 145 in find prime numbers, 72,722 in floating point math, 109,588 in integer math, 33,486 in multithread, 1,843 in physics, 43,196 in random string sorting, and 4,185 in single thread (also recorded as 4,185 in singlethread). The average benchmark score for the AMD part is 49,796.

The Intel Processor 300T has no such scores. Its percentile rank of 50 indicates that it sits at the median of all CPUs, but without specific benchmark data, no exact performance figures can be cited. The AMD part's percentile rank of 90 indicates that it outperforms 90 percent of all CPUs in the database. This percentile difference is the only quantitative comparison available between the two parts. The AMD part's nearest rivals include the Intel Core 9 273PE with an average score of 49,845 and a delta of -0.1 percent, the Intel Core i5-14600KF with an average score of 49,394 and a delta of 0.8 percent, the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 with an average score of 49,228 and a delta of 1.2 percent, and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G with an average score of 49,196 and a delta of 1.2 percent. These rivals all have average scores very close to the AMD part's 49,796, indicating that the AMD part performs in a similar class to these desktop and mobile processors.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the recorded data, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 wins in every measurable category. The AMD part has 4 times the cores and 4 times the threads of the Intel part. The AMD part has a higher base clock (3.60 GHz versus 3.40 GHz) and a recorded boost clock of 5.00 GHz, while the Intel part has no boost clock recorded. The AMD part has a larger L3 cache (32 MB versus 6 MB), which benefits workloads that repeatedly access large datasets. The AMD part has a higher memory bandwidth (256.0 GB/s recorded), which supports memory-intensive tasks such as data compression and encryption.

The AMD part's integrated graphics, the Radeon 8060S, is a more capable solution than the Intel UHD Graphics 710, based on the naming and positioning in the database. The AMD part supports ECC memory, which is important for error-sensitive workloads such as scientific computing or financial modeling. The AMD part uses a quad-channel memory bus, which provides higher theoretical memory throughput compared to the Intel part's dual-channel bus.

The Intel Processor 300T wins in the category of power consumption. Its TDP of 35 W is lower than the AMD part's TDP of 55 W. For systems where thermal output and power draw are primary constraints, the Intel part has a specification advantage. The Intel part also uses PCIe Gen 5, which is a newer standard than the AMD part's PCIe Gen 4, though the AMD part's PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes remains fully sufficient for most applications. The Intel part has a larger L2 cache per core (1.25 MB versus 1 MB), which could provide a minor advantage in certain single-threaded workloads that fit within the L2 cache.

The Intel part targets the desktop market segment, while the AMD part targets the mobile market segment. This means the Intel part is designed for installation in desktop motherboards with Socket 1700, while the AMD part is designed for mobile systems with Socket FP11. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $82, which is a lower price point than the AMD part, though the AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP. The Intel part's release date of 2024-01-07 is earlier than the AMD part's release date of 2026-01-05, so the Intel part has been available for a longer period.

For users building a desktop system with minimal power draw and basic computing needs, the Intel Processor 300T offers a low-TDP option. For users who need high multi-core performance, large cache, fast memory, and capable integrated graphics, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 388 is the part that the data supports. The AMD part's benchmark scores, when compared to its nearest rivals, show it performing at a level consistent with high-end desktop processors, despite being a mobile part. The Intel part, with no recorded benchmark scores, cannot be placed on the same performance scale. The data clearly favors the AMD part for any performance-oriented task.