AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 vs Intel Core 7 360 Comparison

The data presents a stark contrast between two mobile processors aimed at very different segments. The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 and the Intel Core 7 360 occupy opposite ends of the performance spectrum, and their benchmark results leave little room for ambiguity. The AMD part dominates the vast majority of computational workloads, while the Intel chip shows a narrow but consistent lead in a specific single-threaded metric. This analysis breaks down where each processor excels, the architectural reasons for the divide, and what the recorded scores imply for potential use cases.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark landscape is almost entirely one-sided. The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 claims victory in 15 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests. Its wins span every category of multi-core and multi-threaded performance, including all Cinebench iterations, PassMark’s integer and floating-point math tests, data compression and encryption, and physics simulations. The scale of these victories is substantial, often exceeding 100% improvements over the Intel part. This indicates that for any workload that can leverage multiple cores or high memory bandwidth, the AMD processor is the clear choice. The data shows it is designed for heavy, sustained computational tasks.

Conversely, the Intel Core 7 360 wins only 2 of the 17 head-to-head benchmarks. Both of these victories are in the PassMark single-thread test, where it scores 4274 against the AMD’s 4028. This is a modest lead of 5.8%, but it is a consistent one across two recorded instances of the same test. This suggests that in a very specific, lightly-threaded scenario, the Intel chip can edge out its competitor. However, this single win is dwarfed by the magnitude of the AMD’s victories elsewhere, making it a narrow bright spot in an otherwise dominant performance picture.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental design philosophies of these two processors are radically different. The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 is built on the Zen 5 architecture using TSMC’s 4 nm process node. It is a high-performance part with 12 cores and 24 threads, supporting simultaneous multithreading. Its cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core, alongside a substantial 64 MB of shared L3 cache. This large pool of cache is a critical factor in its performance advantage.

The Intel Core 7 360, by contrast, is built on the Wildcat Lake architecture using Intel’s 3 nm process node. It is a low-power, efficiency-focused design with only 6 cores and 6 threads, lacking multithreading. Its cache configuration is different, with 192 KB of L1 and 2.5 MB of L2 per core, but only 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The smaller L3 cache and lack of SMT are significant handicaps in multi-threaded workloads. The AMD chip’s 4 nm process and larger, more complex architecture are geared toward maximum throughput, while the Intel chip’s 3 nm process and simpler core design are geared toward minimal power consumption, as indicated by its dramatically lower TDP.

Another major architectural divergence lies in memory support. The AMD processor supports LPDDR5X over a quad-channel memory bus, providing a theoretical bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. The Intel processor supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, but only over a single-channel memory bus, yielding a theoretical bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. This is a fourfold difference in memory bandwidth, which directly impacts any workload that is memory-bound, such as data compression, encryption, and physics calculations. The AMD part also supports ECC memory, while the Intel part does not.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results show a consistent and massive performance gulf. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 scores 36064, which is 164.5% higher than the Intel Core 7 360’s 13634. This pattern repeats in single-core tests, where the AMD chip scores 5091 in Cinebench R23 single-core, a 164.6% lead over the Intel’s 1924. The consistency of this 164% delta across all Cinebench versions (R15, R20, R23) and both single and multi-core tests is remarkable. It suggests a fundamental per-clock performance advantage for the AMD architecture, not just a raw core-count advantage.

The PassMark suite reveals even wider margins in specific workloads. The most extreme example is integer math, where the AMD processor scores 146519, a staggering 327.9% higher than the Intel’s 34238. This is a clear indicator of the AMD chip’s superior ALU throughput. Data compression follows closely, with the AMD part scoring 487145, a 241% advantage over the Intel’s 142877. This workload heavily benefits from the AMD chip’s larger L3 cache and higher memory bandwidth. Even in floating-point math, where the advantage is comparatively smaller, the AMD chip still leads by 101.5%, scoring 90594 versus 44963.

The only reversal comes in the PassMark single-thread test. The Intel Core 7 360 scores 4274, edging out the AMD’s 4028. This 5.8% lead is notable because it contradicts the Cinebench single-core results, where the AMD chip holds a massive lead. This discrepancy implies that the PassMark single-thread test measures a different aspect of performance, perhaps a specific instruction mix or memory access pattern that favors the Intel core’s design. However, this single victory does little to offset the AMD’s dominance in the other 15 tests.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on almost every key specification. The core and thread counts show the most fundamental split: the AMD has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel has 6 cores and 6 threads. The clock speeds also differ, with the AMD base clock at 3.20 GHz and boost at 5.00 GHz, compared to the Intel’s 1.50 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost. The power envelopes are drastically different, with the AMD TDP rated at 55 watts and the Intel at 15 watts. This indicates the AMD is designed for performance, while the Intel is designed for extreme efficiency.

The memory subsystem presents another clear separation. The AMD supports LPDDR5X only, with a quad-channel bus and a bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. The Intel supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, but with a single-channel bus and a bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The AMD also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the Intel. The integrated graphics differ as well: the AMD features a Radeon 8050S, while the Intel uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The sockets are incompatible, with the AMD using AMD Socket FP11 and the Intel using Intel BGA 1516. The process nodes also differ, with the AMD on TSMC’s 4 nm and the Intel on Intel’s 3 nm. The release dates are also distinct, with the AMD launched in January 2025 and the Intel scheduled for April 2026.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 supports quad-channel LPDDR5X with a bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. The Intel Core 7 360 supports single-channel DDR5/LPDDR5X with a bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s.

Q: Which CPU wins in the Cinebench R23 multi-core test?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 wins decisively, scoring 36064, which is 164.5% higher than the Intel Core 7 360’s 13634.

Q: Is there any benchmark where the Intel Core 7 360 wins?

A: Yes, the Intel Core 7 360 wins the PassMark single-thread test, scoring 4274 against the AMD’s 4028, a difference of 5.8%.

Q: What are the TDP values for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 has a TDP of 55 watts, while the Intel Core 7 360 has a TDP of 15 watts.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 has 64 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core 7 360 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear conclusion. The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 is engineered for maximum multi-threaded performance. Its 12-core, 24-thread design, combined with 64 MB of L3 cache and 256.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth, delivers an overwhelming advantage in rendering, data processing, and scientific computing. The benchmark results show it is the appropriate choice for any user whose primary workloads can utilize its massive parallel throughput, and its launch MSRP is $426 for the Intel part, though no price is recorded for the AMD. The Intel Core 7 360, with its 6 cores, 6 threads, single-channel memory, and 15-watt TDP, is designed for a different purpose entirely. Its modest 5.8% lead in a single PassMark test does not compensate for its significant deficits elsewhere. The data confirms the Intel chip is suitable for basic, efficiency-focused tasks where battery life and low heat generation are paramount, but for raw computational power, the AMD processor is in a different class entirely.