AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 vs Intel Core 3 201E Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep: the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 wins all 11 head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the Intel Core 3 201E. The largest margin appears in passmark_find_prime_numbers, where the AMD part scores 320 versus 57 for Intel, a 461.4% advantage. That result indicates a massive gap in pure integer iteration workloads, likely reflecting the AMD chip’s higher core count and thread count.

Beyond prime number calculation, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 dominates in extended instruction throughput. Its passmark_extended_instructions score of 45,666 exceeds the Intel Core 3 201E’s 11,035 by 313.8%. This workload typically stresses SIMD and specialized instruction paths, and the data shows the AMD processor delivering more than four times the throughput. The Intel part’s 10 nm node and older architecture appear to limit its ability to execute these instruction streams efficiently.

In integer math, the AMD chip scores 152,414 against 43,894 for Intel, a 247.2% delta. The floating-point math result tells a similar story: 99,548 for AMD versus 33,260 for Intel, a 199.3% lead. These two metrics together suggest that the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 handles both general-purpose arithmetic and scientific computing with substantially more headroom. The 12 cores and 24 threads of the AMD part, combined with 64 MB of shared L3 cache, provide the resources needed to sustain high throughput across parallel workloads.

Data compression and encryption also favor AMD heavily. The passmark_data_compression score of 554,760 for the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is 237.9% higher than the Intel Core 3 201E’s 164,160. Encryption performance shows a 211.1% advantage, with AMD scoring 27,784 versus 8,931 for Intel. These results indicate that the AMD processor can accelerate archive creation, database operations, and secure communication tasks far more effectively.

Random string sorting, a proxy for memory-access patterns and pointer-chasing workloads, gives AMD a 234.5% lead (59,487 versus 17,783). The AMD part’s quad-channel LPDDR5X memory interface, with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, clearly outperforms Intel’s dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 setup at 76.8 GB/s. The memory subsystem difference alone may explain a significant portion of this benchmark gap.

The multithreaded PassMark score of 45,231 for AMD versus 14,839 for Intel represents a 204.8% advantage. Physics simulation, often used as a proxy for gaming physics and constraint solving, shows AMD ahead by 153% (2,887 versus 1,141). Even the single-thread scores, where the Intel part’s higher base clock of 3.60 GHz might have helped, favor AMD: 3,927 versus 3,482, a 12.8% delta. The AMD boost clock of 5.00 GHz, though slightly lower than Intel’s 4.80 GHz on paper, delivers better single-thread performance in the measured results.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies and manufacturing nodes. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 uses a 4 nm TSMC process, while the Intel Core 3 201E uses a 10 nm Intel process. This node advantage gives AMD a significant transistor-density and power-efficiency lead. The AMD chip’s die size is listed as 2x 70.6 mm², suggesting a chiplet design, whereas Intel uses a monolithic 163 mm² die.

The core configurations differ sharply. AMD provides 12 cores and 24 threads, while Intel offers only 4 cores and 8 threads. The AMD processor’s architecture is Zen 5, with the codename Strix Halo; Intel’s architecture field is not specified, but its codename is Bartlett Lake. Both are active production parts, but the AMD chip targets mobile (Socket FP11), while Intel targets desktop (Socket 1700).

Cache hierarchies also diverge. Both share 80 KB of L1 per core, but AMD’s L2 is 1 MB per core versus Intel’s 1.25 MB per core, a slight Intel advantage. The L3 cache, however, is dramatically different: AMD has 64 MB shared, while Intel has only 12 MB shared. This 52 MB difference explains much of the AMD lead in data-heavy workloads like compression and sorting.

Memory support is another major differentiator. AMD uses LPDDR5X with a quad-channel bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5 through a dual-channel bus, providing 76.8 GB/s. Both parts support ECC memory, but the AMD memory path offers over three times the bandwidth, which directly impacts any workload that streams large datasets.

PCIe connectivity also differs. AMD provides Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while Intel offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). Intel’s newer PCIe standard could benefit storage and GPU expansion, but the AMD processor’s integrated graphics, Radeon 8060S, is far more capable than Intel’s UHD Graphics 730. The database records no details on the Radeon’s compute units or clock speeds, but the product positioning suggests a substantial GPU performance gap.

The AMD part’s TDP is 55 watts, lower than Intel’s 60 watts. Despite the higher power envelope, Intel’s processor delivers far lower performance across every recorded benchmark. The Intel Core 3 201E has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and boost clock of 4.80 GHz, both respectable, but the four-core limit caps its parallel throughput. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 runs a 3.20 GHz base and 5.00 GHz boost, with the boost clock exceeding Intel’s by 0.20 GHz.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison. No workload in the recorded data favors the Intel Core 3 201E. The closest contest is single-thread performance, where AMD leads by only 12.8%. That result indicates that Intel’s higher base clock and slightly larger L2 cache per core do help narrow the gap in lightly threaded tasks, but they do not overcome AMD’s architectural efficiency.

For multithreaded workloads, the AMD processor’s 12-core, 24-thread configuration delivers a 204.8% advantage in PassMark multithread and a 237.9% lead in data compression. Any application that scales with core count, such as video encoding, 3D rendering, scientific simulation, or database processing, will see disproportionately better performance on the AMD part. The physics benchmark, which often reflects game physics and engineering simulation, shows a 153% lead for AMD, confirming that even latency-sensitive parallel workloads benefit.

The AMD chip also excels in memory-bound tasks. Random string sorting, which depends heavily on cache and memory bandwidth, shows a 234.5% advantage. The quad-channel LPDDR5X interface with 256.0 GB/s provides the data feed necessary to keep 12 cores busy. The Intel part’s dual-channel 76.8 GB/s bandwidth becomes a bottleneck even with only four cores.

For encryption and extended instructions, AMD’s lead is even more pronounced. The 313.8% advantage in extended instructions and 211.1% lead in encryption suggest that the AMD processor includes more capable cryptographic and SIMD execution units. The Intel Core 3 201E’s older 10 nm node and limited core count constrain its ability to process these instruction streams in parallel.

The Intel Core 3 201E does hold advantages in specific hardware attributes. Its PCIe Gen 5 support is newer than AMD’s Gen 4, which could matter for future storage devices or GPUs. Its dual-channel memory supports both DDR4 and DDR5, offering flexibility in system design. The Intel part also has a larger L2 cache per core (1.25 MB versus 1 MB), which might help in some single-threaded loops. However, none of these attributes translate into a benchmark win in the recorded data.

The Verdict

The data presents an unambiguous conclusion: the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 outperforms the Intel Core 3 201E across every measured benchmark. The AMD processor’s 96th percentile ranking among all CPUs, versus Intel’s 73rd percentile, confirms that the gap is not merely a function of the head-to-head tests. The AMD chip’s average benchmark score of 90,541 dwarfs Intel’s 19,056, a ratio of roughly 4.75 to 1.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 sits among much more powerful processors in the database. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 654 (delta of -0.2%), AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX (-0.7%), Intel Xeon w7-2575X (+2.7%), and Intel Xeon 6736P (+3.0%). These are server-class or high-end mobile parts, indicating that the Ryzen AI Max+ 392 competes in a performance tier far above the Intel Core 3 201E. The Intel Core 3 201E, by contrast, sits near AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS (0.0% delta) and Intel Core i5-12400F (+0.1%), which are mainstream mobile and desktop processors.

For users seeking maximum throughput in multithreaded, memory-intensive, or encryption-heavy workloads, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 is the clear choice based on the recorded data. Its 12 cores, 24 threads, 64 MB L3 cache, and 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth deliver performance that approaches server-class processors. The Intel Core 3 201E, with its 4 cores, 8 threads, 12 MB L3 cache, and 76.8 GB/s bandwidth, targets basic desktop tasks where cost and simplicity matter more than raw performance.

The Intel part’s launch MSRP is $134. The AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP, so no price comparison is possible from the data. However, the performance difference is so large that any application that can utilize multiple cores will favor AMD overwhelmingly. The only scenario where Intel might be preferable, based strictly on the data, is a system that requires PCIe Gen 5 connectivity or dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 memory flexibility, neither of which appears in benchmark scores.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 3,927 in passmark_single_thread, while the Intel Core 3 201E scores 3,482. AMD leads by 12.8%.

Q: What is the difference in L3 cache capacity?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 64 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core 3 201E has 12 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: How much faster is the AMD processor in data compression?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 scores 554,760 in passmark_data_compression, which is 237.9% higher than the Intel Core 3 201E’s 164,160.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 supports LPDDR5X with a quad-channel bus, while the Intel Core 3 201E supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core 3 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What is the Intel Core 3 201E’s launch MSRP?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E has a launch MSRP of $134. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 has no recorded launch MSRP.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 | Intel Core 3 201E |

|----------------|------------------------|-------------------|

| Cores | 12 | 4 |

| Threads | 24 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 3.20 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 60 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP11 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die Size | 2x 70.6 mm² | 163 mm² |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1.25 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 64 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Quad-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 76.8 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 16 Lanes | Gen 5, 16 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 8060S | UHD Graphics 730 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2026-01-05 | 2025-01-12 |

| Part Number | 100-000001979 | SRVTR |