AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 vs AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data for these two mobile processors shows a dominant performance gap, with the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 winning 9 of the 11 recorded tests. The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 claims only the two single-thread tests, and by a narrow margin. This is a clear separation of compute tiers within the same Strix Halo family.

The largest victory for the Max+ 392 comes in the prime number search test, where it scores 320 against the PRO 380's 75, a massive 326.7% advantage. This test often reflects raw integer throughput and cache efficiency, and the 392's larger 64 MB shared L3 cache compared to the 380's 16 MB likely plays a significant role here. The physics test also shows a wide gap, with the 392 delivering 2887 versus 1120, a 157.8% difference. This indicates a substantial advantage in multi-threaded floating-point workloads, which are common in simulation and rendering tasks.

In the more general productivity metrics, the Max+ 392 leads by roughly 87% to 91%. For example, in data encryption, the 392 scores 27784 against 14502, a 91.6% lead. Integer math shows a 91% delta (152414 vs 79789), and random string sorting also shows a 91% delta (59487 vs 31153). Data compression results in an 89% delta (554760 vs 293595), while floating-point math and extended instructions trail slightly at 87.5% and 87.7% respectively. The multi-thread benchmark, a strong indicator of overall productivity, shows the 392 at 45231, which is 86.6% ahead of the 380's 24244. These deltas are consistent and large, pointing to a processor that is designed for significantly heavier workloads.

The sole bright spot for the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 is the single-thread test. It scores 3995, which is 1.7% higher than the 392's 3927. While this is a win for the PRO 380, the margin is small. The 380 has a higher base clock of 3.60 GHz compared to the 392's 3.20 GHz, which likely contributes to this slight edge in lightly-threaded tasks. However, the 392's higher boost clock of 5.00 GHz over the 380's 4.90 GHz does not translate into a win here, as the recorded single-thread scores favor the PRO 380.

In the average benchmark score, the Max+ 392 sits at 90541, while the PRO 380 sits at 48171. This places the 392 in the 96th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the 380 is in the 90th percentile. The database's nearest rivals for the 392 include the Intel Xeon 654 (avg score 90717, delta -0.2%), the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX (avg score 91199, delta -0.7%), and the Intel Xeon w7-2575X (avg score 88172, delta 2.7%). For the PRO 380, the nearest rivals are the Intel Core Ultra 5 235A (avg score 48201, delta -0.1%), the Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX (avg score 48287, delta -0.2%), and the AMD Ryzen 9 3900 (avg score 47918, delta 0.5%). The data shows that the Max+ 392 competes in a workstation-class tier, whereas the PRO 380 aligns with more mainstream mobile processors.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is significantly faster. In the passmark_multithread test, it scores 45231, which is 86.6% higher than the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380's score of 24244.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 win any benchmark tests?

A: Yes, the PRO 380 wins the single-thread tests. It scores 3995 in passmark_single_thread, which is 1.7% higher than the Max+ 392's score of 3927.

Q: How do these processors compare in memory bandwidth?

A: They differ significantly. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 supports quad-channel LPDDR5X memory with a bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 supports dual-channel LPDDR5X memory with a bandwidth of 128.0 GB/s.

Q: What is the difference in core and thread counts?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: How does the integrated graphics differ between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses the Radeon 8060S, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 uses the Radeon 8040S.

Q: Are there any differences in the cache configuration?

A: Yes. The Max+ 392 has 64 MB of shared L3 cache, while the PRO 380 has 16 MB of shared L3 cache. Both have the same L1 and L2 cache sizes per core (80 KB and 1 MB respectively).

The Verdict

The benchmark results indicate a clear performance hierarchy. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is the processor for compute-intensive tasks. Its 86.6% lead in multi-thread, 91.6% lead in encryption, and 157.8% lead in physics demonstrate a capability designed for professional workloads like software compilation, 3D rendering, and data analysis. The 96th percentile ranking and its nearest rivals, which include Xeon and Ryzen 9 HX parts, confirm its placement in a high-performance tier.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380, while occupying the 90th percentile, is a different class of chip. Its data shows a focus on efficiency and sufficient performance for mainstream tasks. The 1.7% single-thread win over the 392 is a minor advantage, relevant for lightly-threaded applications but not enough to offset the massive multi-core deficit. Its nearest rivals are Core Ultra 5 parts, which aligns with its positioning as a capable mid-range mobile processor.

Picking between the two depends on the workload. If the task list involves heavy multi-threading, large data sets, or GPU-intensive work, the data points exclusively to the Max+ 392. For standard productivity, content consumption, and occasional creative work, the PRO 380 provides a more modest performance envelope. The 392's larger L3 cache (64 MB vs 16 MB) and higher memory bandwidth (256.0 GB/s vs 128.0 GB/s) further reinforce its advantage in data-heavy applications, while the PRO 380's higher base clock offers a small benefit in low-thread-count responsiveness.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several fundamental specifications. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 has 6 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks differ, with the 392 at 3.20 GHz and the 380 at a higher 3.60 GHz. Boost clocks also differ, with the 392 at 5.00 GHz and the 380 at 4.90 GHz. Both have a 55 TDP and use the AMD Socket FP11.

Memory architecture is a major differentiator. The Max+ 392 uses a quad-channel LPDDR5X memory bus with a bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. The PRO 380 uses a dual-channel LPDDR5X bus with a bandwidth of 128.0 GB/s. Both support ECC memory. The integrated graphics differ as well: the 392 features the Radeon 8060S, while the 380 features the Radeon 8040S. Both use PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The L3 cache is also different: 64 MB shared on the 392 versus 16 MB shared on the 380. The release dates are different, with the 380 released on 2025-01-05 and the 392 released on 2026-01-05.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on the same foundational architecture: Zen 5 on a 4 nm TSMC process node, under the Strix Halo codename. However, the implementation differs. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is part of the "Ryzen AI Max" generation (Zen 5 (Strix Halo)), while the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 is part of the "Ryzen AI Max PRO" generation (Zen 5). The die size is recorded for the 392 as 2x 70.6 mm², but no die size is listed for the 380.

The core count difference (12 vs 6) is the primary architectural separation, leading to the divergent thread counts (24 vs 12). The cache hierarchy changes alongside the core count. While both have 80 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core, the shared L3 cache is significantly larger on the 392 at 64 MB versus 16 MB on the 380. This larger pool of shared cache on the 392 is likely a key factor in its substantial lead in the prime number and physics benchmarks. The memory controller is also architected differently, with the 392 supporting quad-channel memory and the 380 supporting dual-channel, resulting in a 256.0 GB/s versus 128.0 GB/s bandwidth difference. The integrated graphics processor is different, with the 392 using the Radeon 8060S and the 380 using the Radeon 8040S, indicating a difference in the GPU compute units within the same Strix Halo family.