AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 356H Comparison

AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 356H

The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 and Intel Core Ultra 7 356H are two mobile processors aimed at different workloads, and the recorded benchmark data shows a clear split. The AMD part, built on Zen 5 with 12 cores and 24 threads, dominates in heavy multi-threaded and single-threaded CPU tasks, while the Intel part, with 16 cores and 16 threads on Panther Lake, counters in specific math and encryption workloads. The database shows the AMD chip winning 11 of 17 head-to-head tests, while the Intel chip wins 6, yet the Intel chip holds a slight edge in a few targeted areas that matter for specialized use cases.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 is the decisive winner in rendering and compression workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD chip scores 36064 against the Intel chip’s 18395, a 96.1% advantage. This is the largest delta in the entire head-to-head set, indicating that the AMD part excels in tasks that scale across many threads. The Cinebench R20 multi-core test shows a 24.6% lead for AMD (15146 vs 12153), and Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a 19% lead (3635 vs 3055). Data compression also favors AMD heavily, with a score of 487145 versus 336177, a 44.9% difference. Integer math is another AMD stronghold, scoring 146519 versus 83111, a 76.3% lead. Random string sorting goes to AMD by 29.6% (53113 vs 40990), and extended instructions favor AMD by 38.8% (38716 vs 27898). The multithread PassMark test shows AMD ahead by 22.8% (41737 vs 33978).

Single-core performance is also largely AMD’s territory. Cinebench R23 single-core shows AMD at 5091 versus Intel’s 2040, a 149.6% lead, the second-largest delta in the dataset. Cinebench R20 single-core gives AMD a 24.7% edge (2138 vs 1715), and Cinebench R15 single-core shows AMD ahead by 69.3% (513 vs 303). These results indicate the AMD part has a substantially stronger per-thread execution capability, likely due to its higher boost clock of 5.00 GHz compared to the Intel part’s 4.70 GHz.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H wins in six tests, but these are narrower margins. Floating point math goes to Intel by 12.2% (103128 vs 90594), which is the largest Intel win. Data encryption favors Intel by 4.7% (26345 vs 25097), and find prime numbers gives Intel a 3.4% edge (327 vs 316). Physics simulation goes to Intel by 4.6% (2895 vs 2761). Single-thread PassMark shows Intel slightly ahead by 1.1% (4072 vs 4028), and the same margin appears in the singlethread test. These wins are all under 13%, suggesting that in these specific workloads, the Intel architecture’s design choices, such as its larger per-core L1 cache of 192 KB versus AMD’s 80 KB, provide a measurable but modest advantage.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge fundamentally in their architecture. The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 uses Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm process from TSMC, with a codename of Strix Halo. It has 12 cores and 24 threads, meaning each core supports two threads simultaneously. The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H uses Panther Lake architecture on a 3 nm process from Intel, with 16 cores and 16 threads, indicating no simultaneous multithreading. This core count difference is notable: Intel has more physical cores, but AMD’s threading capability allows it to process more concurrent instruction streams.

Cache hierarchies differ significantly. AMD provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 64 MB of L3 cache. Intel provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 18 MB of L3. The Intel part’s larger per-core L1 and L2 caches suggest better local data retention, which may explain its wins in floating point and prime number finding. However, AMD’s 64 MB shared L3 is substantially larger than Intel’s 18 MB, which likely benefits multi-threaded workloads that share data across cores.

Memory support also separates the two. AMD supports LPDDR5X memory on a quad-channel bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth, and it supports ECC memory. Intel supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X on a dual-channel bus, providing 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth, with no ECC support. The AMD part has more than double the memory bandwidth, which directly supports its higher scores in data compression and integer math, as these benchmarks often stress memory throughput. The Intel part’s lower bandwidth may constrain its multi-threaded performance despite having more physical cores.

The integrated graphics differ as well. AMD includes Radeon 8050S graphics, while Intel includes Intel Xe3 Graphics. The database does not provide graphics benchmark scores, so a direct comparison is not possible from this data. PCIe support also varies: AMD uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while Intel uses Gen 5 with 12 lanes (CPU only). Intel’s newer PCIe generation offers higher per-lane bandwidth, but AMD provides more lanes. Socket types are distinct: AMD uses Socket FP11, and Intel uses BGA 2540, meaning these processors are not interchangeable in any system.

Base and boost clocks differ. AMD runs at a 3.20 GHz base clock and 5.00 GHz boost clock, while Intel runs at 1.90 GHz base and 4.70 GHz boost. The AMD part’s higher boost clock aligns with its dominant single-core Cinebench results. The Intel part’s lower base clock may reflect its lower TDP of 25 watts versus AMD’s 55 watts, though the database does not include power consumption measurements beyond these TDP figures.

The Verdict

For workloads that depend on multi-threaded rendering, compression, and integer processing, the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 is the clear choice based on the recorded data. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 36064 is nearly double the Intel part’s 18395, and its 96.1% advantage in that test indicates a massive throughput gap. The AMD part also leads in data compression by 44.9% and integer math by 76.3%, making it suitable for video encoding, database operations, and scientific computing tasks that rely on these operations. The higher memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s and larger 64 MB L3 cache likely contribute to these results.

For workloads that are sensitive to floating point math, encryption, or physics simulation, the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H shows a measurable edge. Its floating point score of 103128 versus 90594 is a 12.2% lead, and its data encryption score of 26345 versus 25097 is 4.7% ahead. These are specialized tasks, but they represent real use cases in financial modeling, cryptography, and certain simulation environments. The Intel part also wins in PassMark single-thread by a narrow 1.1% (4072 vs 4028), which suggests that in lightly threaded applications, the two are nearly equivalent, with Intel having a slight advantage.

The overall average benchmark score places the AMD part at 56273, while the Intel part sits at 41215. The AMD part ranks in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel part ranks in the 87th percentile. The AMD part’s nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470, scores 56306, a mere 0.1% difference, indicating that the AMD part is closely matched with its own sibling. The Intel part’s nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440, scores 41208, essentially identical at a 0% delta. These percentile and rival comparisons confirm that the AMD part operates in a higher performance tier overall.

The choice comes down to the workload. If the priority is maximum multi-threaded throughput, the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 delivers a substantial advantage across nearly every Cinebench and PassMark multi-thread test. If the priority is specific math operations like floating point or encryption, the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H offers a narrower but real edge in those areas. The Intel part’s 16 physical cores without threading do not compensate for its lower clock speeds and memory bandwidth in most tests, but they do provide a foundation for its wins in physics and prime number finding.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core Cinebench R23 score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 scores 5091, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H scores 2040. AMD leads by 149.6% in this test.

Q: How much faster is the AMD part in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 scores 36064, and the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H scores 18395. This gives AMD a 96.1% advantage.

Q: In which benchmark does the Intel processor have its largest win?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H wins floating point math with a score of 103128 versus AMD’s 90594, a 12.2% lead.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 provides 256.0 GB/s over a quad-channel LPDDR5X bus. The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H provides 115.2 GB/s over a dual-channel DDR5 or LPDDR5X bus.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H does not.

Q: How many threads does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H has 16 cores and 16 threads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 occurs in Cinebench R23 single-core, where it scores 5091 versus 2040, a 149.6% lead. This result indicates that the AMD part’s per-core performance is far superior in this rendering workload. The second-largest win is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, with AMD scoring 36064 versus 18395, a 96.1% lead. These two tests alone show that AMD dominates both single-threaded and multi-threaded rendering.

PassMark integer math is another major AMD win, scoring 146519 versus 83111, a 76.3% lead. This test measures arithmetic operations that are common in general-purpose computing, and the gap suggests AMD’s core design handles these operations more efficiently. Data compression shows AMD ahead by 44.9% (487145 vs 336177), and extended instructions give AMD a 38.8% lead (38716 vs 27898). Random string sorting adds a 29.6% win for AMD (53113 vs 40990). PassMark multithread shows AMD ahead by 22.8% (41737 vs 33978), and Cinebench R20 multi-core gives AMD a 24.6% edge (15146 vs 12153). Cinebench R20 single-core favors AMD by 24.7% (2138 vs 1715), and Cinebench R15 multi-core favors AMD by 19% (3635 vs 3055). Cinebench R15 single-core gives AMD a 69.3% lead (513 vs 303).

The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H wins are all narrower. Floating point math is its best result, with 103128 versus 90594, a 12.2% lead. Data encryption goes to Intel by 4.7% (26345 vs 25097). Find prime numbers gives Intel a 3.4% win (327 vs 316). Physics shows Intel ahead by 4.6% (2895 vs 2761). PassMark single-thread and singlethread both show Intel at 4072 versus 4028, a 1.1% lead. These wins indicate that while Intel is competitive in these specific areas, the margins are much smaller than AMD’s margins in its winning tests.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts differ: AMD has 12 cores and 24 threads, while Intel has 16 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks differ, with AMD at 3.20 GHz and Intel at 1.90 GHz. Boost clocks differ, with AMD at 5.00 GHz and Intel at 4.70 GHz. TDP differs, with AMD at 55 watts and Intel at 25 watts. Sockets differ: AMD uses Socket FP11, and Intel uses BGA 2540. Architecture differs: AMD uses Zen 5, and Intel uses Panther Lake. Process node differs: AMD uses 4 nm from TSMC, and Intel uses 3 nm from Intel. L1 cache per core differs: AMD has 80 KB, and Intel has 192 KB. L2 cache per core differs: AMD has 1 MB, and Intel has 2.5 MB. Shared L3 cache differs: AMD has 64 MB, and Intel has 18 MB. Memory support differs: AMD supports LPDDR5X only, while Intel supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Memory bus differs: AMD is quad-channel, Intel is dual-channel. Memory bandwidth differs: AMD provides 256.0 GB/s, Intel provides 115.2 GB/s. ECC support differs: AMD supports ECC, Intel does not. PCIe differs: AMD uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes, Intel uses Gen 5 with 12 lanes. Integrated graphics differ: AMD has Radeon 8050S, Intel has Intel Xe3 Graphics. Release dates differ: AMD was released on 2025-01-05, Intel on 2026-01-04. Production status is Active for both, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.