AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 vs Intel Core 3 100HL Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a dominant performance profile for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 across the entire PassMark benchmark suite. In all 11 head-to-head comparisons, the AMD part finishes ahead of the Intel Core 3 100HL, with the margin ranging from a modest single-thread edge to an overwhelming multi-core and compute-heavy gap.

The largest single delta appears in the passmark_find_prime_numbers test, where the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 320 against the Intel Core 3 100HL's 48, a difference of 566.7%. This workload, which is highly sensitive to raw integer execution throughput and memory latency, shows the AMD processor delivering more than six times the result of the Intel part. Benchmarks results indicate this is not a close contest in any compute-dense scenario.

The passmark_extended_instructions test shows a similarly lopsided result. The AMD chip records 45,666, while the Intel chip manages 12,463, a delta of 266.4%. This workload measures SIMD and specialized instruction efficiency, and the Zen 5 architecture in the AMD part clearly extracts far more work per cycle than the Raptor Lake design in the Intel processor. The margin here is more than three and a half times in favor of AMD.

In passmark_physics, which typically stresses scheduling and cache coherence across many threads, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 2,887 versus 928 for the Intel Core 3 100HL, a 211.1% advantage. The AMD part has 12 cores and 24 threads, compared to 8 cores and 12 threads for Intel, and that raw thread count translates directly into a physics simulation lead. The delta of 211.1% is consistent with the core and thread ratio, though the AMD advantage is even larger than the simple 2:1 thread count would suggest.

The passmark_integer_math test shows the AMD processor at 152,414, against 56,308 for Intel, a 170.7% lead. This is a strong indicator of general-purpose compute capability for compilation, scripting, and data processing workloads. The passmark_data_compression test follows a similar pattern: AMD scores 554,760, Intel scores 202,225, a 174.3% delta. Compression workloads benefit from both high memory bandwidth and large caches, and the AMD part's 64 MB shared L3 cache and 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth provide a substantial structural advantage over the Intel chip's 12 MB L3 and dual-channel memory bus.

The passmark_multithread score, which is the aggregate result for heavily threaded workloads, shows AMD at 45,231 and Intel at 17,586, a 157.2% delta. This is the most telling overall metric for productivity and content creation tasks. The passmark_random_string_sorting test, which measures memory access patterns and sorting efficiency, shows AMD at 59,487 versus Intel at 23,223, a 156.2% lead. The passmark_floating_point_math test records AMD at 99,548 and Intel at 42,108, a 136.4% delta, indicating strong scientific and engineering compute performance from the Zen 5 architecture.

Encryption workloads show the AMD processor at 27,784 versus 11,964 for Intel, a 132.2% advantage. This is a narrower margin than the compute-heavy tests but still a decisive win. The only close contest is in passmark_single_thread, where AMD scores 3,927 and Intel scores 3,735, a mere 5.1% delta. Both the passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread entries confirm this identical result. While the AMD processor still wins, the single-thread performance gap is small enough that day-to-day lightly threaded responsiveness would feel similar between the two.

The overall average benchmark score tells the same story. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 holds an average score of 90,541, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Intel Core 3 100HL averages 23,545, sitting in the 76th percentile. The AMD part's nearest rivals in the database are the Intel Xeon 654 at 90,717 (0.2% higher), the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX at 91,199 (0.7% higher), the Intel Xeon w7-2575X at 88,172 (2.7% lower), and the Intel Xeon 6736P at 87,864 (3.0% lower). This places the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 in serious workstation-class company. The Intel Core 3 100HL, by contrast, sits near the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U at 23,709 (0.7% higher), the Intel Core i5-11500 at 23,718 (0.7% higher), the Intel Core Ultra 7 266V at 23,297 (1.1% lower), and the AMD Ryzen 7 5800H at 23,277 (1.2% lower). The Intel part is a mid-range desktop processor, while the AMD part operates at a much higher performance tier.

The Verdict

The data shows no ambiguity: the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 wins every single head-to-head benchmark against the Intel Core 3 100HL. The margin is decisive in compute-heavy workloads, with deltas ranging from 132.2% to 566.7%, and even the closest test, single-thread performance, still goes to AMD by 5.1%. The AMD processor's average benchmark score of 90,541 is roughly 3.8 times the Intel part's 23,545, and the percentile placement confirms the gap: 96th percentile for AMD versus 76th percentile for Intel.

The Intel Core 3 100HL is the appropriate choice only for scenarios where its lower 45 W TDP, smaller physical footprint, and desktop Socket 1700 compatibility are mandatory constraints. It uses DDR4 and DDR5 memory, has a dual-channel memory bus, and integrates Iris Xe Graphics 48EU. These are structural differences that matter for specific system designs, not performance advantages. The AMD part uses LPDDR5X memory, supports quad-channel operation, and integrates a Radeon 8060S graphics solution, which is a more capable iGPU on paper.

For anyone selecting a processor based on benchmark results, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is the clear choice. It delivers more than double the multi-threaded performance, more than triple the extended instruction throughput, and over six times the prime number computation rate. The only scenario where the Intel part might be preferable is if the system requires DDR4 support, lower power draw, or a desktop socket, none of which are performance benefits.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process node, with the Strix Halo codename. The Intel Core 3 100HL uses the Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm Intel process node, with the Raptor Lake-PS codename. The process node difference is substantial, with AMD's 4 nm process allowing for denser transistor packing and better power efficiency per operation. The AMD die size is listed as 2x 70.6 mm², indicating a chiplet design, while Intel's die size is not recorded in the database.

The core configurations differ significantly. The AMD part has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel part has 8 cores and 12 threads. The AMD processor has a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, whereas the Intel processor has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The AMD part's higher boost clock, combined with its newer architecture, explains the single-thread win. The L1 cache is identical at 80 KB per core for both, but the L2 cache differs: AMD has 1 MB per core, Intel has 2 MB per core. The L3 cache shows a major divergence, with AMD at 64 MB shared and Intel at 12 MB shared.

The memory architecture is another fundamental difference. The AMD processor supports LPDDR5X memory over a quad-channel bus with a recorded bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. The Intel processor supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, with no bandwidth figure recorded in the database. The AMD part also supports ECC memory, while the Intel part does not. PCIe connectivity differs as well: AMD provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while Intel provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only).

The integrated graphics solutions are completely different. AMD uses the Radeon 8060S, while Intel uses Iris Xe Graphics 48EU. The database does not include graphics benchmarks, so a performance comparison cannot be made from the recorded data. The market segment also differs: AMD is listed as Mobile, Intel as Desktop. The AMD processor uses AMD Socket FP11, while the Intel processor uses Intel Socket 1700.

Specification Differences

The core count is a clear differentiator: AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 12 cores and 24 threads, Intel Core 3 100HL has 8 cores and 12 threads. Base clock speeds are 3.20 GHz for AMD and 2.10 GHz for Intel. Boost clocks are 5.00 GHz for AMD and 4.60 GHz for Intel. The TDP ratings are 55 W for AMD and 45 W for Intel. The AMD processor uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, while Intel uses a 10 nm process from its own foundry.

Cache specifications diverge in L2 and L3. Both have 80 KB L1 per core, but AMD has 1 MB L2 per core against Intel's 2 MB per core. The L3 cache is 64 MB shared for AMD and 12 MB shared for Intel. Memory support differs, with AMD using LPDDR5X and Intel using DDR4 and DDR5. The memory bus is quad-channel for AMD and dual-channel for Intel. Memory bandwidth is recorded at 256.0 GB/s for AMD, while no figure exists for Intel.

ECC memory support is present on AMD, absent on Intel. PCIe lanes are 16 for AMD and 8 for Intel, both Gen 4. Integrated graphics are Radeon 8060S for AMD and Iris Xe Graphics 48EU for Intel. The release dates differ, with AMD listed as 2026-01-05 and Intel as 2024-04-07. The AMD part number is 100-000001979, while the Intel part number is unknown. Neither processor has a recorded launch MSRP, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-thread score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 3,927 in passmark_single_thread, while the Intel Core 3 100HL scores 3,735. The AMD processor wins by 5.1%.

Q: How large is the multi-thread performance gap?

A: In passmark_multithread, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 45,231 and the Intel Core 3 100HL scores 17,586, giving AMD a 157.2% advantage.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 3 100HL does not support ECC memory.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 supports LPDDR5X memory over a quad-channel bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 3 100HL supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, with no bandwidth figure recorded.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has an average benchmark score of 90,541, placing it in the 96th percentile. The Intel Core 3 100HL has an average score of 23,545, placing it in the 76th percentile.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 64 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core 3 100HL has 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD processor also has a 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, compared to no recorded figure for Intel.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 wins every benchmark category in the recorded data. Its dominance is most pronounced in prime number computation, where it delivers 566.7% more throughput, and in extended instructions, where it leads by 266.4%. These results point to workloads involving cryptography, scientific computing, simulation, and any task that relies heavily on SIMD or specialized instruction paths. The physics score of 2,887 versus 928 indicates strong performance for physics simulation and game engine logic. The data compression score of 554,760 versus 202,225 suggests the AMD part is well suited for file archiving, database operations, and data pipeline tasks. The floating point math score of 99,548 versus 42,108 confirms its capability for numerical analysis and engineering workloads. The integer math score of 152,414 versus 56,308 indicates strong general-purpose compute for compilation and scripting.

The Intel Core 3 100HL does not win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison. Its only potential advantages are structural rather than performance-based. It has a lower TDP of 45 W versus AMD's 55 W, which could matter in thermally constrained desktop systems. It supports DDR4 memory, which may be relevant for systems reusing existing DDR4 modules. It uses Intel Socket 1700, which is a common desktop platform. Its 2 MB L2 per core is double the AMD part's 1 MB per core, though this does not translate into any benchmark win. The Intel part's release date of 2024-04-07 is earlier than AMD's 2026-01-05, but the database shows no performance benefit from that earlier availability.

For single-threaded responsiveness, the AMD processor still wins by 5.1%, though the margin is small enough that the Intel part would feel comparable in basic office tasks, web browsing, and light application launching. The AMD part's 12 cores and 24 threads make it the clear choice for rendering, video encoding, software compilation, and any multi-threaded production workload. The Intel part, with 8 cores and 12 threads, is positioned for entry-level desktop systems where power draw and DDR4 compatibility take priority over raw compute. The database records show no scenario where the Intel Core 3 100HL outperforms the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392, making the AMD processor the only logical selection on performance grounds.