AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 vs Intel Core i7-14700F Comparison

The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 and Intel Core i7-14700F occupy different corners of the processor market, one a mobile part built for thin laptops and the other a desktop chip for traditional towers. Yet when the database’s benchmark results are laid side by side, the two trade blows in a surprisingly close contest. The AMD part wins 10 of the 17 head-to-head tests, while the Intel part takes 7, but the margins tell a more nuanced story. The Ryzen AI Max 390 posts an average benchmark score of 56,273 against the Core i7-14700F’s 53,620, a gap of roughly 5% in raw aggregate performance. Both sit at the 91st percentile among all CPUs in the database, meaning they land in the same performance tier despite their architectural differences.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the comparison is the AMD processor’s dominance in the PassMark extended instructions test, where it scores 38,716 against Intel’s 28,564, a 35.5% advantage. This is the largest single-test margin in either direction. The Ryzen AI Max 390 also crushes the Core i7-14700F in the PassMark find prime numbers test, scoring 316 versus 176, a 79.5% lead. That test often rewards efficient integer arithmetic pipelines, and the Zen 5 architecture appears to excel there. The physics test also favors AMD, with a score of 2,761 against 2,455, a 12.5% edge.

Across the Cinebench suite, the AMD part wins every single test, but by a narrow and consistent margin. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ryzen AI Max 390 scores 36,064 against 35,122 for Intel, a 2.7% lead. Single-core R23 shows the same delta: 5,091 versus 4,958, again 2.7%. The pattern repeats in R20 and R15, with multi-core and single-core deltas all sitting at 2.7% or 2.8%. This consistency suggests a fundamental clock-for-clock or IPC advantage for AMD in the Cinebench workloads, even though the Intel chip has a higher boost clock of 5.40 GHz compared to 5.00 GHz.

The PassMark multi-thread test goes to AMD, but barely: 41,737 versus 41,317, a 1% margin. That is the closest result in the entire dataset. Meanwhile, the Intel processor takes the PassMark single-thread test with 4,257 against 4,028, a 5.4% lead, and the identical result appears in the duplicate singlethread entry. This is the largest Intel win in the PassMark family, and it indicates that Intel’s higher clock speed translates into faster single-threaded execution in this specific benchmark.

The data encryption test is a clear win for Intel, with 30,144 against 25,097, a 16.7% margin. Floating point math also favors Intel: 107,005 versus 90,594, a 15.3% lead. Integer math goes to Intel as well, 155,808 versus 146,519, a 6% edge. Data compression and random string sorting are Intel wins too, with margins of 3.7% and 5% respectively. The Intel chip’s 20 cores and 28 threads give it a raw throughput advantage in workloads that scale well across many execution units, even if its architecture trails in other areas.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 is the clear choice for workloads involving extended instruction sets, prime number calculation, physics simulation, and Cinebench rendering. The 35.5% lead in extended instructions suggests the Zen 5 architecture has stronger SIMD or specialized instruction handling. The 79.5% advantage in prime number finding is remarkable and points to a highly efficient integer pipeline for certain algorithmic patterns. The 12.5% physics win indicates better performance in constraint-based or collision-detection tasks, which often appear in game physics or engineering simulations.

The Intel Core i7-14700F wins in data encryption by a wide 16.7% margin, which could matter for disk encryption, VPN throughput, or secure communications workloads. Its 15.3% floating point math advantage makes it the better part for scientific computing, financial modeling, or any task that relies heavily on floating-point arithmetic. The integer math win at 6% and the data compression win at 3.7% suggest Intel handles general-purpose number crunching and archive operations well. The 5.4% single-thread lead in PassMark means Intel wins in lightly threaded applications that respond to raw clock speed, such as older games or legacy software.

The aggregate picture is that AMD wins the rendering and specialized instruction workloads, while Intel wins the encryption and floating point math workloads. The PassMark multi-thread result is essentially a tie, with AMD ahead by just 1%. This split means the choice depends heavily on the specific application mix. A user who spends time in Cinebench or runs physics simulations would prefer the AMD part. A user who works with encrypted data or heavy floating point calculations would lean toward Intel.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, with a die size reported as 2x 70.6 mm². It has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core i7-14700F uses the Raptor Lake architecture on Intel’s 10 nm process, with a die size of 257 mm². It has 20 cores and 28 threads. The AMD chip is built for mobile devices, using the AMD Socket FP11, while the Intel chip is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1700.

Cache configurations differ significantly. The AMD processor has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and a shared 64 MB of L3 cache. The Intel processor also has 80 KB of L1 per core, but 2 MB of L2 per core and only 33 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part’s larger L3 cache, at 64 MB versus 33 MB, likely contributes to its wins in workloads that benefit from larger working sets, such as the extended instructions test. The Intel part’s larger per-core L2 cache may help in other scenarios.

Memory support is another major divergence. The AMD processor supports LPDDR5X memory over a quad-channel bus with a recorded bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. The Intel processor supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, with no bandwidth figure recorded in the database. The AMD part’s much higher memory bandwidth, more than double what a dual-channel DDR5 setup typically provides, likely explains its advantage in memory-sensitive tests like physics and extended instructions. The Intel part’s ability to use legacy DDR4 memory gives it flexibility for budget-oriented builds.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The AMD part offers PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes, while the Intel part offers PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes. The Intel chip’s newer PCIe generation provides higher bandwidth for GPUs or NVMe drives, but the AMD part’s mobile focus means it likely pairs with integrated graphics in a laptop chassis. Indeed, the AMD chip includes a Radeon 8050S integrated GPU, while the Intel part has no integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU. Both support ECC memory, which is notable for workstation use.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts are the most obvious difference: the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core i7-14700F has 20 cores and 28 threads. Base clocks differ substantially, with AMD at 3.20 GHz and Intel at 2.10 GHz, but the boost clocks flip the picture, with AMD at 5.00 GHz and Intel at 5.40 GHz. The Intel part’s higher boost clock helps it win the PassMark single-thread test despite the AMD part’s architectural efficiency.

Thermal design power differs, with the AMD part rated at 55 W and the Intel part at 65 W. The AMD chip’s lower TDP is notable given its competitive performance, suggesting the Zen 5 architecture delivers strong results within a tighter power envelope. The process node difference is stark: 4 nm TSMC for AMD versus 10 nm Intel for the Intel chip. The smaller process node likely contributes to the AMD part’s power efficiency and its wins in instruction-heavy workloads.

The memory bus width is another key spec difference. The AMD part uses quad-channel memory, while the Intel part uses dual-channel. This explains the 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth recorded for AMD, a figure that is not available for Intel. The cache hierarchy also differs: AMD has 64 MB of shared L3, Intel has 33 MB. The L2 cache per core is 1 MB for AMD and 2 MB for Intel. The AMD part lists a die size of 2x 70.6 mm², while Intel lists 257 mm².

Release dates place the AMD part at January 5, 2025, and the Intel part at January 7, 2024, nearly a year earlier. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $359. The AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP. The Intel part’s part number is SRN3Z, while the AMD part’s is 100-000001423. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The AMD part is classified as mobile, the Intel part as desktop.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher multi-core Cinebench score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 wins all Cinebench multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 36,064 against the Intel Core i7-14700F’s 35,122, a 2.7% lead. The same 2.7% margin appears in R20, where AMD scores 15,146 versus 14,751, and in R15, where AMD scores 3,635 versus 3,540.

Q: Where does the Intel Core i7-14700F have its biggest advantage?

A: The Intel part wins the PassMark data encryption test by 16.7%, scoring 30,144 against AMD’s 25,097. It also leads in floating point math by 15.3%, with 107,005 versus 90,594. Its smallest win is in data compression, where it scores 505,885 against 487,145, a 3.7% margin.

Q: How do the two compare in single-threaded performance?

A: The Intel Core i7-14700F wins the PassMark single-thread test with 4,257 against 4,028, a 5.4% lead. However, the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 wins every Cinebench single-core test, including R23 where it scores 5,091 versus 4,958, a 2.7% margin. The results depend on the benchmark.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 uses quad-channel LPDDR5X memory with a recorded bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. The Intel Core i7-14700F uses dual-channel DDR4 or DDR5 memory, and no bandwidth figure is recorded in the database for it.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i7-14700F has 20 cores and 28 threads. The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 has 12 cores and 24 threads. Despite fewer cores, the AMD part wins 10 of 17 head-to-head tests.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 and the Intel Core i7-14700F list ECC memory support as true in the database.

The Verdict

The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 is the better choice for users who prioritize Cinebench rendering, extended instruction sets, prime number calculation, and physics workloads. It wins all six Cinebench tests, albeit by narrow 2.7% to 2.8% margins, and its 79.5% lead in the prime number test is decisive. The 35.5% advantage in extended instructions makes it the superior part for SIMD-heavy or specialized instruction workloads. Its 64 MB of shared L3 cache and 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth provide a strong foundation for memory-intensive tasks. The lower 55 W TDP also makes it more suitable for power-constrained mobile systems.

The Intel Core i7-14700F is the better choice for users who work with encrypted data, floating point math, integer math, data compression, or random string sorting. Its 16.7% encryption lead and 15.3% floating point advantage are substantial. The 20 cores and 28 threads give it raw throughput in heavily threaded workloads that scale beyond 12 cores. The higher 5.40 GHz boost clock delivers a 5.4% single-thread win in PassMark, which matters for older or lightly threaded applications. The dual-channel memory support for DDR4 and DDR5 offers platform flexibility, and the PCIe Gen 5 support provides modern connectivity for high-end GPUs and storage.

For a balanced assessment, the aggregate average benchmark scores place the AMD part at 56,273 against 53,620 for Intel, a 5% overall lead. Both sit at the 91st percentile, confirming they are comparable high-end parts. The data suggests the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 is the more efficient processor, winning more tests with fewer cores and a lower TDP. The Intel Core i7-14700F is the more versatile desktop part, with higher thread counts and wins in encryption and floating point math. The choice hinges on the specific workload mix. Rendering and specialized instructions favor AMD. Encryption and floating point favor Intel. For general-purpose use, the 10-7 win split in AMD’s favor, combined with its higher average score, tilts the verdict toward the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390.